1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

It is JON Lester, right?

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Moderator1, Jul 10, 2009.

  1. Moderator1

    Moderator1 Moderator Staff Member

    Not John?
    I ask because it is John in the July 6 issue of SI.

    Not to pick on SI when everybody is making mistakes. But as I've noted several times - SI used to be about perfect. I played a game as a kid trying to find a typo, a mistake, anything. And never could.
  2. GB-Hack

    GB-Hack Active Member

  3. mediaguy

    mediaguy Well-Known Member

    I wouldn't say it's an every-week deal now, but it's pretty close. Names of established players being wrong is just embarrassing. Like my friend here, who played for the Pottsville Maroons ...
  4. EagleMorph

    EagleMorph Member

    Or like last week, when Dale Earnhardt became Dale Earnhart.
  5. Johnny Dangerously

    Johnny Dangerously Well-Known Member

    Joe Mauer feature a few weeks ago had a photo of him with a woman. No cutline, no mention in the story.
  6. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member

    Old news, now.

    A shame . . .

    . . . but old news . . . and they're not going to pay up to make it right with enough people
    who know what they're looking at, sooooo . . . end of story.
  7. clutchcargo

    clutchcargo Active Member

    Glad everyone on this thread is throwing perfectos every night with their own copy and captions.

    Oh, wait a minute, SI is a big-shot publication everyone idolizes and which used to walk on water, and now the world is falling apart at SI HQ.

    C'mon folks, give it a rest, and quit salivating over every snafu at SI. Your inferiority complexes are showing.
  8. Charlie Brown

    Charlie Brown Member

    Years ago, for many years, rare were the kinds of mistakes that show up today with a frequency that is not alarming by other publications' standards but is by the bar SI set for itself in its prime. There is nothing wrong with pointing that out. It's a way of paying tribute to a level of greatness and lamenting its passing into mere good.
  9. clutchcargo

    clutchcargo Active Member

    I hear you, CB, but the impression I get is that some of these folks here do a better job and spend more time scrutinizing SI copy than they do their own. If they kept their eyes on their own work, their readers might be more apprecitaive.
  10. BYH

    BYH Active Member

    Really? You gleaned all that from a bunch of one-line answers about mistakes in recent SIs? Really? Wow.

    It really is as simple as Charlie Brown said. People are lamenting what SI once was and what it is now.
  11. Tucsondriver

    Tucsondriver Member

    I just resubscribed to SI a few weeks ago because it was cheap enough to do so on Amazon. First thing I noticed was how thin it is compared to my high school days. I was reading the "lineup" page on the July 6 issue and found a typo 2 minutes. Tease for what I thought was an excellent Adrian Gonzalez feature reads: "No only is the Padres slugger a hero in his own Tijuana..."

    Anyway, as has been pointed out here and elsewhere, fewer eyeballs = fewer checks = way more gaffes.
  12. mediaguy

    mediaguy Well-Known Member

    We're not scrutinizing SI copy. We're reading a popular magazine. We post threads when we see stories we like there and think others should read. In the course of doing so, if we find silly mistakes, I think it's fair game. I'm not mercilessly dogging the local weekly ...
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page