A Los Angeles Times web article written Monday, March 17 by Chuck Phillips claims that associates of Sean 'Diddy' Combs were behind the 1994 robbery and shooting of rapper Tupac Shakur. The article says that 'FBI records obtained recently by The Times say that a confidential informant told authorities in 2002 that Rosemond and Sabatino [Combs's associates] "set up the rapper Tupac Shakur to get shot at Quad Studios.' The informant said Sabatino had told him that Shakur 'had to be dealt with.'"
However, in Combs claimed in a statement Monday that "this story is a lie" and Rosemond claims he has never even been questioned by the authorities in this case, calling the story "a libelous piece of garbage".
My concern with this article is its credibility. First of all, Meredith Artley, editor of LAtimes.com, says they chose to run this story on the web because, "The Web audience skews younger. We had all these great multimedia elements, and we said we really don't need to wait to fit this in the paper." She also said they might run a "smaller version" of the story in the actual paper.
Are they using the web as a scapegoat to run stories that may lack credibility? It seems to me that if they actually stood behind their story, a story that is making a profound claim, they would not have a problem running it on the front page of their paper.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Maria - I think you are right. A story really needs to be credible whether it's on the web or in print if it is associated with a legitimate news operation. Otherwise readers will lose trust and won't come back to the site (or the newspaper). I think the web does create a sense of urgency - let's get the news up fast. But at the same time, getting it up wrong won't serve anyone either. Good post.
Post a Comment