November 27th, 2006 → 11:31 am @ Seth Mnookin // No Comments
It’s common practice for newspapers to re-report scoops uncovered by their rivals in order to avoid giving credit; this is a bit underhanded but not unexpected. Acknowleding another publication’s work is even rarer when it comes to “trend” articles — can one outlet truly be said to have “uncovered” this or that health fad or religious fad?
That said, it’s worth pointing out that a full six months before the Times became obsessed with the issue, Details put together a not-insignificant package on the whole rich versus superrich thing. Of course, no one in the Times ever reads Details…right?
Post Categories: New York Times
Mannybeingmanny
18 years ago
Hey Seth…if you haven’t already, check out the last article in the newest Time. More of the Rich versus Super-Rich debate…this time told through some political cartoons. Can someone please tell me why these publications care about this story at all? Let alone now?
Gawker
18 years ago
Superrich Trend Pieces: The Breakdown…
That seemingly endless series of Times stories on the superrich got us thinking: Is this the start of a new……
New York News Headlines
18 years ago
Superrich Trend Pieces: The Breakdown…
That seemingly endless series of Times stories on the superrich got us thinking: Is this the start of…