I’m curious how mr. Cloutier is going to try to spin his way out of this one. I’m also greatly disappointed with the NY Times which apparently doesn’t try to get both sides of a story (anymore?).

Posted by Robb Irrgang on 24 November 2007 @ 1pm

So they wrote about you
referred to your web site
but didn’t take the time to give you a call, or an email

special

Posted by sue on 24 November 2007 @ 5pm

To be fair, the writer did write to me before the story came out, and I simply referred her to my post, which is generally all I have to say about this anymore. Still, the errors listed here should have been obvious. I’m sure it’s a breakdown in the fact checking process and nothing malicious on the writer’s part, but wrong is wrong, and I expect more out of the NY Times.

Posted by Derek Powazek on 24 November 2007 @ 7pm

Thank you for sharing the truth.

I can see the huge potential of growth lying in 8020 Publishing.

Best of luck!

Posted by Justine on 24 November 2007 @ 8pm

How pathetic!!

Posted by Julie on 24 November 2007 @ 9pm

How smug! I can’t read it tonight, it makes me too mad.

Posted by Julie on 24 November 2007 @ 9pm

I have it on file (ie waiting in my bookmarks) to read. The NYTimes, unfortunately, has a history of bad fact checkers…it’s truly a shame that their incompetence should hit you as well. Harrumph.

Posted by ro on 24 November 2007 @ 10pm

I loved JPG, it was a great magazine that rested high on my stacks around the homestead.

However when I first heard of this back in May I stopped buying it. What happened was a snapshot of why I hate “business men.”

I didn’t say anything then, so now I just wanted to say I salute you Derek for taking the high road.

Posted by Keith on 25 November 2007 @ 11am

See, now I don’t understand why Mr. Paul couldn’t have taken the “high ground” and just said nothing when they talked about you and your departure. I don’t presume to know anything about what happened backstage, but from the get go it just seemed to me, an outsider, that Paul and some of the others were just very cruel, catty and whiney. They didn’t act maturely on a human level or business-wise.

Like I said, this is coming from a spectator. And reading this article really just reconfirmed my decision to leave JPG Magazine. Why support such seemingly vindictive, bitter people? Too many other awesome folks out there to give money to.

Posted by mihow on 25 November 2007 @ 11am

On the last point, Derek, you snipped a few important words from your quotation. The Times (as of 9:43pm Eastern, Sunday the 25th of Nov.) says: “And he said Mr. Powazek obstructed . . . .”

The antecedent of “he” is clearly Mr. Cloutier. So, to be fair, I think they’re printing uncorroborated opinion not as fact, but as explicitly attributed uncorroborated opinion.

Posted by Robbie on 25 November 2007 @ 7pm

I don’t think the NYTimes daily paper gets fact checked… only the weekly Magazine. Generally only magazines are fact checked (and not always either!).

Posted by John on 3 December 2007 @ 7am