Chronicle
Pro: The Bay Area section; the Food and Wine section (unless there are egregious and gross errors that make me create blogs about the local newspaper); occasionally, the Style section.
Con: Poor coverage of news; drunken or perhaps nonexistant copy editing staff; lack of reporters; color of pink pages; "The Poop." Too many to list really.
USA Today
Pro: That part where they have a news story from every state; an apparently-functional copy editing staff; above-par newspaper boxes; their obsession with graphs and charts.
Con: Their obsession with graphs and charts; poor coverage of news; de facto loudspeaker for conservative America.
I don't know what to say. It's kind of like comparing rotten apples to moldy oranges.
Wednesday, December 6, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comments:
Great blurb from "California Lawyer" December 2006 (sorry, I know this is a copy type-o and improper citation, but this comment section will not allow me to either underline or italicize).
"In an article about the San Francisco police department’s use of force, the San Francisco Chronicle ran a large picture of a man identified as Sergeant John Haggett, whose alleged use of force was described in the accompanying text. As the paper later admitted, however, the man in the photo was not Haggett, had never been a police officer, and had nothing to do with the story."
Post a Comment