Some Late-Breaking Events

1. Often I discover an event in print or online but don’t enter it into my phone etc. until it is closer, in scme cases not until later the same day I learned about it and/or it is said to occur.

   So I am offended that you don’t have a prominent correction online to the print City week event for TODAY! Did you learn about your error prior to it going to press?

   At some point someone might of learned about the event being soon online- and then assumed, like one assumes when reading the back of a SPRINT cell phone receipt, that time is up, 14 days have passed, and one might as well be stuck having missed out on the opportunity to try some other company and learn more. The people that visit this blog and read City week in print later tonight are likely to believe they have missed tomorrow nights election corruption talk. They are unlikely to spread the word to print only readers that it’s not tonight BUT tomorrow. Unlikely to stake out tonights auditorium to do there best speaking for the author that somehow has something better to do then follow the incredible publicity and have reality comform to the information you have provided those who skim over reams of print instead of just say digging whatever whatever there water bill suggests they should put on there coffee table.

   Such an error could of been discovered while the presses ran. You brag about how you r un them late to include election results. But here, we know you let them run the misinformation from the first plate to the last.

2. NOT!!!”The night this issue officially hits the street[s]”!!! but rather (the editorial quote excerpted above is entirely invisibly omitted from the version at
   http://www.tucsonweekly.com/gbase/CityWeek/Content?oid=oid:102312) tomorrow, Friday.

   Those who have read his work might further have not found out about a university community welcome presentation to a largely student audience this afternoon. Or chose not to attend it as once is enough at least for a day. Even if the weekly just believed the press release provided, which is likely where the error originated second only to the speaker perhaps changing his mind after the first press release went out, we who go online should both find a prominent section to find corrections so as to not hunt for them, and in any revised content see notice of the revision as well.

   There are choices the weekly makes when it announces a cable contract public meeting the afternoon BEFORE the “night th[at] issue officially hit… the street” instead of mentioning the meeting itself that preceded it in the calendar as opposed to in fine print of some oddly biased or merely incompetent driveby chime.

   People are assembling right now for this talk. At least those foolish enough to believe your claim about when they could listen in.

   Since there is no preview and I’m not certain how to make the link clickable and it doesn’t go to the even only I do have to paste the corrected information, although I don’t vouch for the time, just the date and place:

   “Fooled Again: The Real Case for Electoral Reform”
   7 p.m., Friday, Oct. 26
   UA Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Auditorium, northeast corner of Speedway Boulevard and Mountain Avenue
   626-9825

   New York University professor, author and media critic Mark Crispin Miller will talk about his book, Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election and Why They’ll Steal the Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them), on Friday.

   ………”

3. Hey Karl,

   I’m not a representative of the Weekly, but I understand your frustration. However, while some errors do get introduced to the final copy at times, this particular error would not be a “stop the presses” situation.

   In short: first, you should be glad or thankful you received featured status in City Week. Believe it.
   The interns who help select the City Week listings each go through 100 to 200 PR pieces and event submissions each week to select which events get in. That means there was a small chance your event, or any event, would get in.

   Second, hey buddy nice way to look like a jerk. Bitching out an editorial staff is the least conducive way to get your message heard, and can cause a halo of bad feelings over your future events.

   Think in terms of an editor reading your next PR piece and saying, “Oh it’s that guy who bitched us out – no reason to feature his event.” In fact, it’s not only “that guy” — think even more like “Oh it’s that group the ‘Hanson Film Institute’ — well forget them.”

   Again, I can see your concern regarding the disinformation, but I must admonish your way of publicly reacting to it.

   _______________
   (Note: “IPH” is not a representative of the Tucson Weekly, Wick Communications or anybody relating to this blog, nor makes any claim of representation with what he just said above.)

4. — Bitching out an editorial staff is the least conducive way to get your message heard, and can cause a halo of bad feelings over your future events.

   hmmm iph this sounds jibes with the scuttle butt i’ve heard around town.
   if you show some backbone and call them on a mistake/error and so on they’ll first attack you with names as i discovered first hand: jerk, coward, dick etc.
   then as iph noted, if you don’t back down you basically get black listed.
   no fruit cup for you!
   sadly its the readers who suffer since they apparently only run story’s in city week that cow tow.
   so instead of informing us readers with the best in arts etc. we hear about only those who lead the circle jerk.
   life is unfair.
   so smile as you grease up and maybe you’ll get a reach around.

5. — then as iph noted, if you don’t back down you basically get black listed.

   i should note however in addition to black listing they also offer something called: the better reader rehabilitation program.
   i tried it and its just wonderful.
   at first the toothpicks holding your eyes open sting a bit but eventually you’ll start to see the errors of your ways.
   then they place a pod under your bed in the middle of the night and when you wake up all this just dosent matter any more.
   so peace my brother.
   wick is love.

6. I posted a correction and explanation about the “Fooled Again: The Real Case for Electoral Reform” event on this blog.

   Please allow me to clarify our City Week coverage and procedures.

   We receive more than 100 emails and press releases each week announcing upcoming events. City Week is written by myself, our interns and at times other freelance writers.

   We select events that we believe will appeal to our readers. We try to spread the coverage out as best as possible, covering a variety of events.

   Receiving a bitchy comment about something in the listings or City Week is at times par for the course. We don’t wipe out events from the system based on crabby people.

   If anyone wants to talk to me directly about City Week and the listings section to voice complaints or heap praise on us, shoot me an email or give me a call at 295-4230. I’ll be glad to explain our process further or answer any lingering questions.

7. “if you show some backbone and call them on a mistake/error and so on they’ll first attack you with names as i discovered first hand: jerk, coward, dick etc.”

   Actually you were called a jerk because you were a jerk.

   If you politely call somebody on a mistake, usually they’ll own up to it. If you call them on a mistake while characterizing them negatively and implying there’s some sort of unethical conspiracy going on behind the scenes, then yeah, you’re a dick — and an idiot.

8. Sometimes ladies can let themselves get turned into Nurse Ratched.

9. — Actually you were called a jerk because you were a jerk.

   nah. one person’s jerk is another’s debutant.
   imho i began my comments here as a perfect gentleman but evolved into a dick based upon the feedback to my comments.
   review the video tape.
   analyze it play by excruciating play if you will.
   but not me.
   no sir ree.
   that’s all water under the bridge for me at this point.
   open your heart to the holy trinity of jimmy/james/jim and you too will see the light.
   all is well.
   wick is love.
   vootie.

10. — Sometimes ladies can let themselves get turned into Nurse Ratched.

    nice.

11. Which reminds me, whatever happened to Tortillas? (Not to accuse, but I am curious)

12. Ultimately I was unable to attend the talk on Friday. This as well is the first time I have been back here to see if my comments are still up.

    IPH seems to believe I was involved in the event. I was not. I would of attended it had it been as printed.

    I won’t make the same mistake however and assert the Weekly would not have in fact stopped the presses given the chance.

    The subtler point I tried to make can be made by what’s in my back pocket. The yet unfollowed postRTA/ellipticalvoyeuringing debacle bus book.

    I have not cracked it’s folded covers. But I know the following.

    It contains numerous errors that are obvious AND no presses are able to create additional savings from continous operation within an order of magnitude of it’s run. That is to say the still used technology doesn’t require a menial skill in moving movable type around should a typo, missed run, etc. be discovered, but rather mere pushes of a button that will modify future plates used to produce each many many copies.

    So it’s not a case of actually stopping a press. Rather the burden is to say “keep on reproducing that error- yeah, let’s have the all be the same!”

    This morning I listed to kfma on my cell phone from before sunrise. I’m not a radio listener and have never heard this morning show before. They mocked the food recall though. Seven figures of pizza’s- that’s actual pizza’s not dollar value have been recalled.

    Did anyone get my point??? That the purpose of corrections in prominence is to attempt at least to undo harm AND allow archival access to proceed without it continuing to be inflicted. I would of preferred to have been reassured that in future should such a not even still explained blunder occur at least one could discover it when seeing the corrected info online. I want to be able to look online before reading an erroneous print publication if sufficient time has passed for it to be demined. I want a section to be as this late breaking thing should be about actually late breakign developments most germane to the publication and the issue printed. Not a woe to not employing local talent but instead waisting much fuel so as to save a perverted buck and truck the local words hundreds of miles and the hours that represents before they embrace the present.

    Fact is the elite get the print edition more then a day earlier then the audience advertisers think they are paying to reach when given the number of tons of virgin fiber it’s still legal to so loot from. And that’s not just cuz the marts in burbs hav kicked your dispenser to da curb— which reminds me… you’ve got one impounded behind Bear Down next to the Satellite dish in the pool.

13. Request note mere permission not needed is made to eliminate one copy of my duplicated note and Irene is correct only technically when she used the past tense to defend while failing to disclose it was just EIGHT MINUTES PRIOR SOME EIGHTEEN HOURS AFTER MY FIRST POST AND AS I RESPOND TO HER THERE about eight hours prior to the event did she reply here and there.

    Her phrasing above is missleading. It does not include a link. The explanation belongs in this thread not in a special one posted when some 90 plus percent of hits to this issue have long come and gone. The point is she learned the day the paper hit campus of the error on both her part and as I speculated correctly about some tentative effort at press an unknown amount of time ago.

    I do not imply conspiracy. I did not. It’s contempt to the principle too inoftely heard to the cliche of having a duty TO appear improper at times in the course of being accountable and doing good. Failing that is impropriety worse then the mere image of a wider warning could possibly have been.

    The so called explanation is not even one containing the lecturers name. I say it was reluctantly truncwhatevering misswritten apparently that deliberately.

    I mean a headline carries with it responsibility. It’s not a classified ad. Not a multiplex list of staggered movie times multiple projectors chewing through the same hugely spooled print a little longer we can hope.

    Specifically why should the below wait until nov 1st and why oh why do you think that calling someone generically a “sponsor” gives you the right to unfairly blame them for your lack of corroberation prior to publication? Isn’t that what your supposed to do, check facts, ESPECIALLY!! on “press releases”????

    “Corrections
    Due to a production error, the credit for the photo that ran with “Trends and Trespass” (Currents, Oct. 25) was incorrect. That photo was taken by Matt Clark of Defenders of Wildlife.
    Due to an incorrect date on a news release from the event promoter, the date of Mark Crispin Miller’s talk was incorrect last week in both City Week and our lectures listings. The talk was slated for Friday, Oct. 26, not Thursday, Oct. 25.

    In “More Bulldozing?” (Currents, Oct. 25), according to the Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection’s Carolyn Campbell, the off-site acreage needed for conservation at the Mission Peaks development to adhere to the Sonoran Desert Protection Plan should be at least 8,000 acres, at an estimated cost of $50 million, for American Nevada–not the 3,500 acres quoted in the story.

    We apologize for the mistakes.
    ”

    Although you can see this print echo at
    http://www.tucsonweekly.com/gbase/Opinion/Content?oid=102620

    not surprisingly there is no link at the bottom of the page to blog on it itself nor is it given a link to itself but instead hidden or given the last word in the outside letters fit for printing section. I mean mailbag is supposed to be where you don’t argue! Isn’t? It’s for comments to you, not from you?
    It is hope that drives me and lives in this suggestion still not taken. Let those who read papers well after the ink has dried do so as more then the cheapness of the speech contained should enable. Let us into all you’ve known that we should first learn before we soy our finger through the night and overly display added plundering plight.

14. A picture says a thousand words:
    http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n243/garethpostans/not_this_shit_again.jpg

15. Get some help Karl. Start by counting to 10 and then back down to 0, breathe in and out.

    Stop ranting.

    You dont make any sense and you sound insane. Make your point and move on, no need to write manifestos.

    Where did you learn to write? Please dont say you have a college degree, please! It will cheapen mine!

Comments are closed.