First time visitor? Learn more.

“Fact-Checking the New York Times”? …Please

by ChenZhen ( 133 Comments › )
Filed under Blogwars, LGF at January 23rd, 2010 - 9:41 pm

Recently, netizens across the blogosphere were treated to an interesting piece on the NYT‘s website, which made an attempt to summarize the drama that has played out over the past couple of years in our little corner of the interwebs.  As I sat and read it, I noted that while there were many points made by the author (Jonathan Dee) that hit the nail on the proverbial head, there were others that seemed like trivial criticism (if one can call it that).  One example of the latter was this pronouncement:

L.G.F. still has more than 34,000 registered users, but the comment threads are dominated by the same two dozen or so names.

I say trivial because, well, the bolded section probably characterizes virtually every blog and message board out there.   Given the context of the site in question  (it’s popularity, and the time span involved in generating the numbers), I wasn’t sure that it really meant anything.  I basically shrugged my shoulders, and read on.  There were certainly juicier nuggets in there, as it turned out.

However, today, I couldn’t help but notice (and who wouldn’t; it’s highlighted in pink at the top of the page) that CJ took issue (<–that link should work, BTW) with that particular line.  I guess I shouldn’t be that surprised.  After all, as we’ve learned, in CJ’s world, he is special.  He wants everyone to know he’s special.  And if necessary, he’s willing to pull out his MySQL search kung fu in a hilarious attempt to try to prove it.

Out of all of the scathing stuff posted in Dee’s piece, only a straw-grasping egomaniac would venture a rebuttal by posting this:

Of course, one doesn’t need to be Nate Silver to know that this attempt at a “fact-check” is an utter load.  Heck, I gotta think that anyone who posesses more than a pair of firing synapses could see that.   With no reference to the total number of comments, threads (i.e. “discussions”), or the prominent 24 commenters, an excersise that concludes that there are a bunch of netizens that average a mere 3 comments per day on his blog doesn’t refute what Mr. Dee stated at all.   Not one bit.  Sure, the mouth-breathing sycophants that still inhabit the site might eat it up, but by “fact check” standards, it amounts to nothing more than a statistical smokescreeen.

Judging by the pseudo-NUMB3RSesque response, one would think that CJ would have no problem addressing the -again, rather meaningless- assertion directly.   But he didn’t.  Why?

So, since Dee threw out the number “two dozen”, and since LGF’s memory apparently expands to at least the last 30 days,  I hereby present the obvious, junior high level, fill-in-the-blank question to CJ, in the true spirit of “fact-checking”:

In the past 30 days, the top two dozen posters at LGF have contributed ___% of the total comments.

Not exactly requiring an essay.

Exit question:  In the unlikely event that CJ actually divulges this, can anyone guess the number?


Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

Comments are closed.

Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By All of Us