Isn't this what Journo-School supposedly tells us?

So, the NYT Ombudsman asks

I’m looking for reader input on whether and when New York Times news reporters should challenge “facts” that are asserted by newsmakers they write about.

[...]

Another example: on the campaign trail, Mitt Romney often says President Obama has made speeches “apologizing for America,” a phrase to which Paul Krugman objected in a December 23 column arguing that politics has advanced to the “post-truth” stage.

     Huh....  So you're wondering if the Grey Lady should question whether or not something a "newsmaker" asserts?  As in...  Fact Checking?  There's a debate on this?  Seriously?  I mean if Barack Obama would declare that the sky was red, I'm pretty confident that the NYT reporter that was writing the story would "fact check" that.

Today Barack Obama in a speech in UpperWestern Jalopistan made reference to the fact that the he needed the help from labor unions to make the sky blue again, which President Obama erroneously claimed was the "color of blood", despite the fact that this reporter could plainly see it was actually a deep blue with puffy white clouds.

     I mean, come on...  This just sounds so tone-deaf, it's ridiculous.  Now, to make a brave attempt at mindreading, I suppose we can guess that Mr. Brisbane is arguing that the NYT should simply "report what they are told" by the "newsmakers".  So a newspaper should simply be a deliverer of data from Point A(the newsmaker's mouth/PR) to Point B(my eyeballs)?

     My god, it's called the 21st century!?!  We have 9 quintillion different places we can get "data delivered" on the internet today.  Twitter, Faceboo, Google+, email, blogs, aggregators, AP, Tumblr, etc.  What we need is interpretation, distillation, and yes, FACT CHECKING for gods sakes.  The whole idea is that we (the public) don't have the resources, time, money, knowledge, etc to delve into each and every single sentence and utterance you get from a "newsmaker".  We want to PAY SOMEONE or at least VIEW THE ADS OF SOMEONE who has the ability, time, resources, interest, knowledge, etc to do that for us.  That's the reason we might choose to pay for your paywall!  We're not going to pay for something we get 10000 other places?  We're going to pay for "unique" or "better" content.  The NYT and many other "premium/national" newspapers are able to do that "better" content, and they make money because of it.  

     To hear this guy innocently ask "hey, you know I have this question, this friend of mine...  suppose he went to this place, you know, and he um, well he did this stuff..."  In my opinion it's insulting.  To seriously ask if the readers of the NYT would want the content they're presented with to be fact checked, and overt lies either pointed out or at least questioned is just... I don't even know the word...  Infuriating?  Embarassing?  Face-slappingly obvious?  

Apple's Foreign Cash Hoard - Seeking Alpha

Increasingly, Apple's cash lies overseas out of easy reach, a trend that will pose a considerable challenge for the company in instituting a significant dividend, buyback, or U.S. acquisition. For the foreseeable future, Apple's foreign wealth will keep getting larger: Ultimately, Apple may become more of an overseas business with a U.S. division hindered from a lack of ready cash.

Wow... So seriously....  with a U.S. division hindered from a lack of ready cash.  How on earth is 28 BILLION dollars in cash considered a "lack of ready cash"?  That makes zero sense to me.  

Granted, if Apple wanted to buy HTC, you might say they had a "lack of ready cash", but seriously, such a ridiculous statement.  

What really got me going is actually related to the whole "tax repatriation holiday" conversation that's been happening throughout 2011.  Corporations (including Apple) have been lobbying congress hard to get this holiday.  And as a "non-person", it makes sense for corporations to try and get this enacted.  Not because it's good for the country, it's yet another way that "corporations" can get a nice fat Tax Cut, while the Rest-Of-US™ need to understand that our belts need tightening, just like a household, and we should get used to 7-8% unemployment, stagnant wages, and reduced Social Security/Medicare/Unemployment benefits down the road...

These are just hard times and the little people just need to suck it up, because you know if the Jaaahb Creators get to bring that money home at 3 or 5% instead of 35% taxes...  Well...  You just *KNOW* they're gonna generate them a whole heapin' pile of jobs.  They certainly aren't just going to pocket that money, or hand it out in Dividends to rich investors...  That would just be...

Wrong?

Why not Begin at the Beginning

So after several years of no blogging, (twitter/facebook/Google+ don't count) lets see how this goes.