How many of them know about the story anyway? Telegraph and mail haven't printed a correction, and the only place it appeared in depth was on a guardian blog.
On 07/07/2009, Stefan Magdalinski <[email protected]> wrote: > > Of course, the journalists should be kicking themselves that they got > finessed out of the better story - Blears used her clout to get a > civil servant fired for an emailed comment to her website. > > On 6 Jul , at 23:52:05, paul perrin wrote: > >> I think a similarly high profile 'right to reply' would be in order. >> >> 99.99% of the people reading the 'right to reply' will not have seen >> the original story, and 99.99% of people who saw the original story >> will not see the right to reply... >> >> So don't directly mention the original story in the 'right to reply' >> - just say how wonderful 'mysociety' is, and mention in passing that >> it is financed by public contributions (of time and money) and is >> jealously independant so would not disclose any data unless obliged >> by law etc... >> >> A google on "You are a disgrace (including all the other honourable >> members)" (having uniquely weird grammar) shows mail, telegraph and >> guardian from MSM. >> >> Paul /)/+) >> >> ps. looking further I have just seen the guaridan story is about the >> mysociety denial! pump that publicity!! >> >> >> 2009/7/6 Tom Steinberg <[email protected]> >> I will ask all the journalists who published the story without >> checking (and perhaps the bloggers too) if they'd like to donate, as >> part of asking for corrections! >> >> Tom >> >> >> >> 2009/7/6 Alexander Harrowell <[email protected]>: >> > On Monday 06 July 2009 15:40:03 Matthew Somerville wrote: >> > >> >> > I would guess that - if the story is not actually invented out >> of whole >> > >> >> > cloth, which has to be a live consideration - they picked up a >> > >> >> > confirmation e-mail coming *in*. >> > >> >> >> > >> >> Hmm, I guess there are chinks in my armour even when I try to be >> totally >> > >> >> clear. You can't comment on TheyWorkForYou without registering, so >> > >> >> comments are either visible or reactively hidden if they're drawn >> to our >> > >> >> attention. No comment equal to, or like in any way I tried, the one >> > >> >> quoted by the Telegraph exists in the site's database in any form >> that I >> > >> >> can find. Just to be clear :) >> > >> >> >> > >> > I'm not arguing that the comment exists, just that a click-here-to- >> confirm >> > message might have been detected by inbound e-mail monitoring. >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Mailing list [email protected] >> > Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: >> > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list [email protected] >> Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: >> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list [email protected] >> Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: >> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public > > -- > /* > Stefan Magdalinski > +447769 666528 (phone) > smagdali (IM/twitter/flickr/dopplr/skype/etc) > */ > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list [email protected] > Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public > -- Etienne Pollard [email protected] +44 (0) 7946 415 996 _______________________________________________ Mailing list [email protected] Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
