Schloppy Sheng, Schlopp--Schloppy Sheng
published stories that were so beyond inaccurate that if the scenario was replayed, i would write her again in a NY minute. i corresponded w/Patterson prior to the piece briefly & urged that he report with accuracy. i knew the bias was gonna be in his article & declined to be interviewed. Look @ his track record (mostly "one day wonder" articles).
he was accurate. the one big error he made was calling the vote to raise the auth shares from 75 to 120 a 45mil share "offering." The article was reportedly corrected today.
his article is laden w/bias.
it's condescending.
it's snide.
but it's also factually correct.
it smacks of agenda & maybe some of it was revenge for his grossly unprofessional colleague @ DJ wire. i tend to think it's much more about financial press focus today in post-dot bomb being about uncovering "evil doers" & a cursory look @ Wave by a skeptic would likely result in concluding it isn't legit.
i didn't excoriate Patterson b/c he reported factually & where he erred, he retracted & corrected. my complaints w/Ellen Shoddy were not about bias, they were about inaccuracy & a total failure to verify contentions (as well as the editorial failure to vet the "facts.")
the DJ conglomerate wants to be out in front on breaking the story of the "wave fraud." The reporters reach conclusions & then fill in the gaps w/supportive quotes.
i don't regret chiding Schloppy in the least & i didn't do anything about Patterson's piece other than acknowledge its overall accuracy.
free ink is good ink (if Wave executes).
don't look to HhH for any kleenex for those tears Op, he needs 'em for the PR campaign materials.
SPIN
PS Tommy - how'd that brake pad deal w/Zelinsky Auto Parts turn out?
