Presumably she calculated the risks – and now her bluff has been called. linky
Somehow I’d missed the line on her resume about the National Enquirer during the first round of this hoo-ha.
I can’t say I was thrilled with her book on Mickey Mantle either. Hey, let’s take a revered sports figure, one with well known problems, who’s dead, and fictionalize every nasty, raunchy, rumor that’s been told about him. It’s not like the Mick’s life was so boring you have to make shit up.
I heard yesterday on the radio (but can’t find a cite) that she’s saying that OJ actually did confess to her and that all networks are negotiating to get an interview with him and have him do it on air.
Well. Here I was thinking that Rupert Murdoch pandered to the base emotions of the masses. But firing her changes everything… :rolleyes:
Good riddance.
I don’t understand the language from the article linked tol
Of course they didn’t immediately return your messages you fucking twits. Else, you would have printed their comments. Suzanne, and her lawyer, didn’t respond to you either. So, you have nothing. I’m so irritated with this convention of saying “…not immediately returned.”
It’s just standard CYA language that takes the onus off the reporter and puts it onto Ms. Regan’s representatives.
Gotta keep the lawyers happy, y’know?
Robin
So you would prefer that the reporters not attempt to get the other person’s point of view on the story?
Yeah, it just lets the reader know that the reporter made an attempt to get the other side of the story, but hadn’t gotten a reponse by press time.
I remember back when I was working at one of my first newspaper jobs, I copy edited a story that took this convention to ridiculous heights. The reporter had devoted, oh, about a half-dozen sentences enumerating every single freaking person who did not return his calls before press time. It was so bush league.
Good. I’m glad she’s fired and that it happened just before Christmas. I hope she never finds another job and ends up on welfare.
But don’t you think that the editor had a policy for the reporters to include all of that?