CJ / Mazzonis

I wrote an email to Mr. Otts, reporter for the CJ. This referenced his article about Mazzonis in the 12/2/08 business section
The quote is from the article. The rest is my email to Mr. Otts. It is a shame that the CJ can't even get basic facts correct. I recognize that mistakes are made, but this is symptomatic of the current CJ. Certainly not the paper I grew up with and the current layoffs will only make it worse.


(Greg)
"Haner married into the family and bought the business in 1996 when the Taylorsville Road restaurant was its only location."

The above is completely wrong. You have probably already heard about this.

GREG Haner bought Mazzonis from his father, KEN Haner in 1996.

GREG Haner did not marry into the Mazzoni family. His mothers maiden name was Mazzoni. KEN Haner married into the Mazzoni family and owned and operated Mazzoni's for many years before selling to Greg.

Sloppy reporting. I am quite sure no one told you that GREG Haner married into the family. You just misread your own notes, if you took notes at all.

Sloppy reporting hurts your credibility with other articles.

Steve Shade

I wrote an email to Mr. Otts, reporter for the CJ. This referenced his article about Mazzonis in the 12/2/08 business section
The quote is from the article. The rest is my email to Mr. Otts. It is a shame that the CJ can't even get basic facts correct. I recognize that mistakes are made, but this is symptomatic of the current CJ. Certainly not the paper I grew up with and the current layoffs will only make it worse.


(Greg)
"Haner married into the family and bought the business in 1996 when the Taylorsville Road restaurant was its only location."

The above is completely wrong. You have probably already heard about this.

GREG Haner bought Mazzonis from his father, KEN Haner in 1996.

GREG Haner did not marry into the Mazzoni family. His mothers maiden name was Mazzoni. KEN Haner married into the Mazzoni family and owned and operated Mazzoni's for many years before selling to Greg.

Sloppy reporting. I am quite sure no one told you that GREG Haner married into the family. You just misread your own notes, if you took notes at all.

Sloppy reporting hurts your credibility with other articles.

Steve Shade

Although I agree with your sentiments regarding the CJ, I have a major issue with your approach. You probably could have made the same point to Mr. Otts without being snarky and absolute. Your tone - "I am quite sure" and "if you took notes at all" - undermines your own credibility at the very moment you are questioning Mr. Otts'. Using other people's mistakes as an excuse to be rude falls in the "two wrongs don't make a right" category.

And, although I agree with your sentiments regarding the CJ, I'm not as quick to trace these flaws back to individual reporters. What if Mr. Otts was just having a bad day, or was given misinformation, or... Absolutely finding fault in his work (claiming he misread his notes) and then connecting this error back to the current condition of the CJ seems like a large leap.

Although I agree with your sentiments regarding the CJ, I have a major issue with your approach. You probably could have made the same point to Mr. Otts without being snarky and absolute. Your tone - "I am quite sure" and "if you took notes at all" - undermines your own credibility at the very moment you are questioning Mr. Otts'. Using other people's mistakes as an excuse to be rude falls in the "two wrongs don't make a right" category.

And, although I agree with your sentiments regarding the CJ, I'm not as quick to trace these flaws back to individual reporters. What if Mr. Otts was just having a bad day, or was given misinformation, or... Absolutely finding fault in his work (claiming he misread his notes) and then connecting this error back to the current condition of the CJ seems like a large leap.

The CJ has been getting rid of experienced reporters (read high paid) and replacing with less experienced (read low paid). My credibility is not compromised by pointing out errors.

I have no problems with me being snarky. And of course it is absolute, because he was wrong. Unlikely that he was told that by anyone. He screwed up and nobody at the CJ caught it because they have dumped the proofreaders and fact checkers. If spellcheck doesn't catch errors they don't get caught.

If he was having that bad of a day, he should have stayed home. If pointing out errors is rude, so be it.

I just know that whenever I read an article from the Courier and I have first hand knowledge of the story and the facts, they invariably get something wrong. Happens every time.

I just know that whenever I read an article from the Courier and I have first hand knowledge of the story and the facts, they invariably get something wrong. Happens every time.

And that is why I refer to the building at 6th and Broadway as "The Bird Cage Liner Factory"

Although I agree with your sentiments regarding the CJ, I have a major issue with your approach. You probably could have made the same point to Mr. Otts without being snarky and absolute. Your tone - "I am quite sure" and "if you took notes at all" - undermines your own credibility at the very moment you are questioning Mr. Otts'. Using other people's mistakes as an excuse to be rude falls in the "two wrongs don't make a right" category.

And, although I agree with your sentiments regarding the CJ, I'm not as quick to trace these flaws back to individual reporters. What if Mr. Otts was just having a bad day, or was given misinformation, or... Absolutely finding fault in his work (claiming he misread his notes) and then connecting this error back to the current condition of the CJ seems like a large leap.

The CJ has been getting rid of experienced reporters (read high paid) and replacing with less experienced (read low paid). My credibility is not compromised by pointing out errors.

I have no problems with me being snarky. And of course it is absolute, because he was wrong. Unlikely that he was told that by anyone. He screwed up and nobody at the CJ caught it because they have dumped the proofreaders and fact checkers. If spellcheck doesn't catch errors they don't get caught.

If he was having that bad of a day, he should have stayed home. If pointing out errors is rude, so be it.

Steve,

You either misread what I wrote or I was not clear. I could just blame you ("hey, your error!") but I very much could be the problem. My point was that to point out errors is one thing, but to do so rudely is a different act all together. I found your email to be rude in the way you pointed out the errors to the reporter. So no, pointing out errors is not rude. Being rude is rude.

No harm, no foul. I'm off to enjoy my Friday. I hope you do the same.

-M

Yada Yada Yada .... but Danny Mac's Rocks !!!!