A philosophical question: Should journalists knock down stories that are either false or substantially misreported in other media? This question comes up constantly, and I think there are convincing arguments on both sides. I have long agreed that at a certain point, responsible journalists need to step in and knock down rumors for which no reliable evidence exists
People who access the Web via America Online's browser are reporting they they're seeing old obituaries, or names from other cities whose newspaper sites they've been visiting recently.
A caller today commented on the Sunday Page A1 centerpiece about natural gas pipeline safety. "This is the reason I look to newspapers," she said.
The puzzles that appear in newspapers don't appeal to everyone. But those who like them tend to really like them in my experience
A few readers have been noticing that The Star's print edition has been coming in two different widths over the past few days. What's going on? The paper is in the middle of a transition to a narrower width overall -- part of a general trend that's been happening for decades
If something is published on open social media, its reasonable to assume the author intends for others to view it, and I see no reason in general for journalists to look at it differently.
An emailer this morning asked a question I've heard discussed many times, from both sides of the aisle: "In one of (The Star's) blogs today they referred to the president as 'Mr. Obama.' And while I've noted this before, usually with Fox News, I took this as a sign of disrespect."
This one's a little complex. A recent story in the 913 news magazine talked to the owners of a business called The Bar Method, where they teach fitness classes using a piece of equipment that's called a ballet barre
A cut-off Jumble and Word Gamer earlier this month, and a missing Sudoku today. Puzzlers must be feeling beaten up right now. Today's Sudoku and the Tuesday answer key was inadvertently omitted from today's Star
A caller just now told me she's certain both crossword puzzles in today's print edition have run before in recent weeks. I'm not saying I don't believe her, because readers catch most of The Star's errors. But if there really were such a massive mistake in the puzzles, I can't imagine I would only be hearing about it at 10:40 a.m
We're all idiosyncratic about language in our own way, and something that hits one person as odd may sound totally normal to another. What about this one? A caller today thinks a word in a story over the weekend about a car accident should have been changed. "It says the victim was 'seriously wounded,' but that sounds wrong to me
Its undeniable that journalists, like everyone in the media world, are first and foremost in the business of communication. Readers judge them sometimes harshly on the mechanics as well as the content of their words.
The summer camp guide that ran in the FYI section last week wasn't comprehensive. It didn't have information for camps from Rockhurst High School or the Kansas City Art Institute
A wire story about the upstate New York shootings mentioned a nearby gun factory. Is that necessary?
Not everything you see in the print edition will be on KansasCity.com, and the reverse is true as well. But there are ways to find everything.
Everybody knows what dirty words with asterisks really are. So is it appropriate to print them anyway?
A reader whose title indicates he manages advocacy for a professional association emailed me with a suggestion that has merit, I think: This is not really a question or concern about fairness or accuracy, but a request for just a tiny bit more information. When you folks report on developments with legislation in Topeka or Jefferson City, can you please include the bill number in the report
It's always a bad day when there's something wrong with one of the puzzles in the print edition. This is one of those days. The last line of the answer to yesterday's "Jumble" puzzle is cut off at the bottom of Page 30 of the Preview section
An emailer this afternoon pointed me to a story online about a streetcar open house, set for Wednesday at Union station. While the headline had the right day, the body copy of the story said it was to take place "today." As it turns out, that story was prepared to go into the print edition tomorrow, so "today" is what it should have said