Gawker linked to an interesting post on the Tabloid Baby blog that offers a behind the scenes look at why the New York Times denied one request for correction. Tabloid Baby noted what it thought was an error in this Times article about NY Post gossip columnist Cindy Adams. The piece made reference to how reporters from various entertainment outlets would be "expected to remain corralled behind a length of velvet rope" at a movie premiere. It listed three outlets as examples: Variety, "Entertainment Tonight" and "A Current Affair." Says Tabloid Baby:
A Current Affair was canceled in October 2005, so there’s no way one of
its reporters was behind that velvet rope. Additionally, A Current
Affair was regularly denied access to celebrity red carpet lines,
because it did real tabloid entertainment journalism and refused to
regurgitate studio pap and myths, like ET. So you’d figure the Times
would at least cop to placing a nonexistent reporter at the scene, no?
The Times responded to the request for correction:
Dear Reader:
I am the corrections editor for the Metro department of The Times. Your e-mail was forwarded to me for review.
You
are correct in noting that "A Current Affair" has been canceled.
However, the article does not say that a reporter for "A Current
Affair" was at the premiere of "Inside Man."
The paragraph in question reads:
"Reporters
from Variety, ‘Entertainment Tonight’ and ‘A Current Affair’ might be
expected to remain corralled behind a length of velvet rope, but at a
recent premiere for "Inside Man" at the Ziegfeld Theater in Midtown,
Mrs. Adams curtly rebuffed a perky film publicist who had asked her to
join the salivating pack."
The first part of this sentence is
written in the conditional tense; it means that at red-carpet events
like the premiere, those reporters would probably stay behind the
velvet rope. The second part goes on to describe what happened at this
particular premiere.
Thank you for writing.
Karin Roberts
Assistant to the Metropolitan Editor
The New York Times
