Some Late-Breaking Events

1. Some eight days later I was of course steered here first when looking for a rare word from myself constructively and hastilly typed to spare online readers a notice that within an hour would convince them they had missed Miller’s talk that is apparently still otherwise unremarked about in this issue despite occuring some six days before it.

   And so its’ all about stillFUTURE events today. I ask again. Is there nothing that I have not yet learned is in error but will learn of the hard way when I dig into yesterdays or in fact what I picked up early the day befores rag?

   Spill news of those undercooked beens before I get jammed up by them remaining hidden in the otherwise velvety sauce! Yesterday was campus readers tomorrow. I bet you could of tipped us off to something important about last night. Take the bet. I dare you.

2. Take a writing class or two, it could only help.

3. You’re still going to dog Irene about old stuff, eh? Look, Irene’s one of the nicest people you’ll ever meet. I don’t know why you’re still focused on this. Besides, you weren’t even affiliated with that event, so what’s up?

4. I’d rather you learned to read.

5. Today as mentioned at the latest first on 10/28/2007 the Star is set to publish the last word in support of it’s advertisers RE drinking river water and worse so that Golf Courses don’t have to pay for there share of CAP water.

   After publishing numerous full time advocates tripe (like a lady who commutes from one side of town to the other at least 5 times a week bragging about “living” downtown) it further noted this week in a bit hidden under the title “DISCLOSURE” it won’t do that for supporters of 200 despite having done it for opponents till now, and of course will not disclose it’s interest RE Click etc. when it chimes in Sunday. One wonders if they feel and extra obligation to read the letters that will arrive tomorrow as we are said to be too stupid to be exposed to leaving only them to check there support in the light of what might just be faxed an hour before the last column gets paginated.

   So I’m going to quote a selected amount and hope the third of three sentences is seen as the UTTER HYPOCRYSY THAT IT so psuedo satirically even is (cuz they have contempt as mentioned for thereh readers they do appear self lampooning knowing it doesn’t matter in terms of numbers at the polls if the educated scratch there heads just as long as the wish of the bosses dirests most votes).

   ”
   In keeping with our blackout policy the weekend before elections, Friday will be the last day that the Star runs political letters to the editor and guest columns. This is a fairness issue and a way to ensure that coverage is evenhanded to the end and keeps one side from making a statement that the other can’t rebut. Our endorsements will be recapped Sunday.”

   http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/208424.php
   (top right box)

6. Do you realize that this is the Tucson Weekly and that this blog is about events that werent included in the 11/1/007 issue of the Weekly?

7. Karl,
   I do not understand your point above, but I will explain our listings and my “late-breaking events” blog posts.

   Our deadline for listings is Monday at noon, 10 days prior to the Thursday of publication. Anything received past that time is included in the following issue if an ongoing event, or is not included in the paper.

   Since we receive many events past this deadline, I select four events that were not included in the paper and post them here. These blog entries are posted either on Wednesday or Thursday.

   So this week, I will post some events that were received too late for inclusion in the Nov. 8 issue. They will be upcoming events, similar to those in the paper.

   If you have any further questions, don’t hesitate to contact me directly.

   Thanks for the nice comment, IPH.

8. Frankly, it had not occured to me, and is quite a distillate of evil to suggest it as obvious, that the title of this blog entry refers to mainly events that could of been included in the print issue but for an arbitrary and absurd cut off date.

   The print edition has a corrections section. You continue to refuse to embrace this as the closest thing to that being online. you previously established a blog entry to explain one correction thereby denying almost any chance of actually CORRECTING the error meaningfuly and widely however nearly perfectly untimely.

   That you embrace praise as to how sweet you are shows your loyalty is not to advancing the seriousness with which people of your gender show competence or not on the merits of the work that they do.

   Your error did damage. It was essentail that your incompetence be banal in it’s prominence for it to occur. You admit that given the near certititude of nothing much coming of releases sent to you those submitting them should NOT expect any sort of headline attention. But still you plodded forth without giving any notice and only actual competence on the event sponsors that you try to blame for your travesty of total acceptance of the face of a PRESS RELEASE … that can not be emphasized too much!!!…. without any checking at all or still any fact that would suggest had you spent even seconds -less then a minute- you might of not screwed up many attendees from attendnig.

   You assert no need for remorse.

   Yet the fault was yours. You blame a volunteer! Yet you are paid. I say again this time explicity SHAME! Doubly so for blaming the innocent. You SHOULD not merely certainly could of made all the difference. That your job might only be threatened by your refusal to do it further in this same fashion might very well be the case, if so, and you instead continue to take money for disservice to your readers, you prove what you argue that this is not a coveted role and not much should be expected from those who accept it.

   Let’s all just be nice. What a wonderful creed for preschoolers or say junior junior _________ make that 0-6 month olds……..

9. Hey Krazy Karl – As the other woman in the office, your gender comment really hit me in my balls. The mistake was made in the press release, there is a protocol in submitting information and when it is run in the paper. It has been explained on this blog entry several different ways. Scream at the folks who turned in the wrong information. Scream at someone on the street. Write a letter to the editor instead of hiding behind Karl and insulting us with your sexist barble. Go back Karl from whence you came…. under a rock.

10. — Write a letter to the editor instead of hiding behind Karl and insulting us with your sexist barble.

    now i’m not condoning sexist garble what-so-ever with this post, let me clear on that.
    but i do hope the weekly will embrace racial stereotypes/bias with the same fervor as it apparently fights sexism.
    i’m guessing folks at weekly world news would speak out about a column by dan-o with the hed “those wacky women are at it again” and then consisting of thinly linked ramble titled news from the female world which chronicles stories about women leaving used tampons on the bathroom floors, murdering their families in post-partum rages, and demanding equal pay for equal work.
    yes?

11. Karl,
    There is no arbitrary or absurd cut-off date. The deadline to get a press release in paper is printed several places in the paper and online. Deadlines are necessary so we may get the paper completed, printed and distributed on time.
    We received notification of the incorrect date AFTER our paper was printed. Then we notified our readers about this on the blog AND we also printed a correction in the Nov. 1 issue on page 8. We apologized for the errors and incovenience both on the blog and in the paper.
    And yes, let’s be nice.

Comments are closed.