General Category > Hackensack Discussion
My favorite paper is not having a good day
BLeafe:
Back to the sad, sorry show - and thank you to anyone reading this who manages to trudge through it all and understands why this all needs to be out there. Hopefully, at least one of the people reading this works at The Record, is in a position of authority and does not appreciate how the paper currently looks to anyone with a decent command of the language.
The Fives & Flubs carnage continues:
Victor E Sasson:
You've been cataloging these errors for how long, and you claim one of your readers works at The Record and cares how the paper looks? No he or she doesn't or you wouldn't have anything to write about. It's getting worse, not better. As for the union truck parked in front of a no parking sign, were you suggesting it should be ticketed?
You are aware the paper isn't even edited in New Jersey anymore? After Gannett took over, more than 350 layoffs included nearly all of the remaining copy editors, the last line of defense against grammatical and factual errors, and the enforcers of style. The design studio for The Record was in Neptune, N.J., where Gannett's crappy Asbury Park Press was published. That place closed, and design of The Record was moved somewhere out of state where minions work on a number of Gannett papers.
Victor E Sasson:
DIABETIC SHOCK:
The readers of The Record's print edition are predominantly older, and I imagine many went into diabetic shock when they saw a huge photo on the Better Living cover last Friday, Feb. 8, of a French dessert called tarte Tartin topped with a scoop of ice cream, said to be served at a restaurant in Westwood.
The cover photo was part of a story on "5 new restaurants you need to try now" by Food Editor Esther Davidowitz, who single handedly has recommended more unhealthy or low quality, crappy food than any other single staffer at the paper. (There's the number 5 again, suggesting that is all the room the paper had on that Friday, when you include blown-up photos of the recommended dishes.)
Don't you resent some faceless food editor claiming you must try a restaurant and do it now? What arrogance. Davidowitz is one of the staffers who survived the Gannett takeover; the rest of the staff is made up of young, inexperienced reporters who don't know shit from Shinola, and can't possibly fathom some of the biggest issues in Hackensack, such as the impact of tax-exempt non-profits on the property taxes paid by homeowners and small businesses.
Two days earlier, on Wednesday, Feb. 6, the Better Living cover article carried these headlines:
"Urge to splurge"
"Treat yourself to fabulous food at these 14 restaurant"
Make sure your gas tank is full or that your electric car is fully charged, if you intend to eat at all of them. Although Bergen County is where the majority of readers live, eating at most of the 14 would be a road trip -- the recommended restaurants are in Princeton, Warren, New Brunswick, Merchantville, Swedesboro, New Hope (Pa.), Collingswood, Middletown and Asbury Park.
And, of course, if you went to any of those 9 far-off restaurants and wanted to enjoy wine with your dinner, you'd have to have a designated driver.
Davidowitz, the arrogant food editor, sniffs, "Here are 14 NJ restaurants where the food may be more than you're used to paying but it's often better -- much better -- than you're used to getting."
How could she possibly know that? And she wrote "the food may be more..." when she meant to say "the food may cost more..."
What she doesn't say is to assure readers she and the other reviewers whose bylines appear over the article actually paid for their meals; otherwise, the article would be little more than advertising.
BLeafe:
1. Your reading comprehension really needs some work. How else could you get "you claim one of your readers works at The Record and cares how the paper looks?" from "Hopefully, at least one of the people reading this works at The Record, is in a position of authority and does not appreciate how the paper currently looks..."?
Don't waste your time making up stuff because you're gonna get called out on it.
2. "There's the number 5 again"
Thank you, Captain Obvious, but you KNOW I've already got that one tucked away, right? (rhetorical)
BLeafe:
--- Quote from: Victor E Sasson on February 11, 2019, 01:22:04 PM ---As for the union truck parked in front of a no parking sign, were you suggesting it should be ticketed?
--- End quote ---
Once again, you're missing the point. I'm saying that there are big attention-grabbing things in the center of the picture that was chosen to represent the story, yet they are not addressed in either the story OR the caption. Why run the picture if you don't explain what's in it?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version