If you ever get an e-mail from a journalist, there’s one portion of it you should pay attention to more than any other. No, it’s not the part where they’re asking you about the housing development you’re building exclusively for sex offenders; it’s the sign-off.
If it’s “Cheers,” you’re cool. You did OK. If it’s “Regards,” you pissed somebody off, and you better figure out how to fix things, quick.
We apply those same tenets here, every week.
CHEERS to the New York Times for sticking by its story that alleges Google and Verizon may be working together to speed up the Internet for certain companies willing to pay for it. The story was a huge hit to Google’s reputation as a proponent of net neutrality and they’ve been working hard to fight against the bad PR the story has brought. But they haven’t completely refuted what the story says. (MW)
REGARDS to the L.A. Times, for choosing to go solely to anti-gay groups for reactions in their article about the overturning of Prop 8. Because, really? Do we still have to spell out why this is a problem? (DW)
CHEERS to Slate’s Jack Shafer for his unsolicited advice to Newsweek‘s new owner, Sidney Harman, including keeping his vanity-mogul hands off the newsroom, letting the magazine look into the organizations with which he himself is involved and figuring out what to do with the magazine after he dies other than handing it over to his congresswoman wife. (MW)
REGARDS to the Chicago Sun-Times for jumping on the celeb-bashing bandwagon by tweeting, “Only in America can wrongfully accused people spend decades in jail while Lindsay Lohan is out in weeks” as if the two were even remotely equivalent. Wrongfully accused people rotting in jail is the number one problem in the American justice system; Lindsay Lohan going from jail to rehab does not crack the top five million. (KL)
CHEERS and REGARDS to Forbes for its new digital overhaul. On the one hand, they’re really looking forward by getting all their journalists to start blogging and “brand” themselves as personalities. On the other, requiring every writer to take on these new responsibilities could really detract from the quality of, you know, magazine articles. Which are pretty important. (MW)