Blogging about NYT journalists – now with an extra level of proofreading

This is not a first tier, second tier, or even third tier blog. It’s an Nth tier blog. Heck, I don’t even have AdWords!

This is a tiny readership (hi Emily) revenue-free all-but-invisible hobby blog with its own peculiar motivations. So when I write of NYT journalists David Pogue or John Markoff (or, of course, Krugman) I really don’t expect them to read the posts.

Wrong.

In the past week I’ve received corrections under both men’s names. I assume it was either them or an admin, but I tend to think it was them.

In one case I wrote of David Pogue’s “relationship to Apple” when I meant to write “association with Apple”. He politely objected, pointing out his work with Apple is no different than his work with other vendors. A few days previously I speculated that John Markoff had gotten some article information via Wikipedia (not a criticism, that’s where I got it), he said it came from an interview.

I don’t think either of these two journalists, both well respected in the geek community, are regular readers. I instead assume that the Times is reviewing blog posts linking to Times articles and flagging items that might merit correction. (Not for Krugman though – that would be a hopeless task.)

I’m impressed. It helps the Times manage its reputation. It’s certainly put me on my toes. I generally write quickly and hastily, but the next time I cite a NYT journalist I’ll be exceptionally attentive. It’s embarrassing to be corrected, even when it’s done so politely.