For the last few days, I have been monitoring how the New York Times online has been covering the swine flu outbreak. I thought it might be interesting to see how the internet is being used to add depth beyond what a traditional newspaper can offer.
Note: The following links might require a (free) sign-in to view the full story. Looks like the NYT is at least trying to get some demographic information in exchange for its stories.
Last week, nytimes.com put forth an informative, overview story that included a video answering questions about swine flu, a map that showed where cases have happened, a blog, a coverage tracker, and a call out to readers/users to submit stories and pictures.
Not bad, I thought. That is until I logged on tonight. Here is the teaser for the headline story:
With Swine Flu, a No-Pucker Zone?
By JAMES BARRON
Fears of a global pandemic have left some air-kissers out there are wondering if they should be less demonstrative.
Not only is the wording off, but really? Air-kissers? The whole story leaves a bad taste in your mouth. There’s another typo (a missed space between two words, something that rarely happens in newsprint), and what’s with the Gossip Girl–style coverage? If the copyediting and spin of this story are any indication of the direction nytimes.com is heading, I don’t think the future is going to be very bright for the NYT. It is sad that such a prestigious news brand is devaluing accuracy and elevating tabloidish stories.
