My wife told me she read some time ago how someone was complaining about their article being edited and misrepresented on Sott. Anyone know what this might be about? I've been searching everywhere but can't find anything like that. Thanks
Supposedly edited article by Sott
- Thread starter Revolucionar
- Start date
That's what I said was probably the case. I was just wondering if anyone had heard of this particular case so that I can find it and set the record straight. My wife saw it awhile ago and doesn't remember any particulars.
Have read many articles over the years and this is not something recalled - as Laura said, inserts (Comments:) are sometimes added. So, if the article happens to be from the NYT, for instance, you might get a 'comment' such as "Given that this is the New York Times..." If the author happens to read the comment, they might not be please to be critiqued. Such is life.
Sorry, I should have been a bit more precise in my question. I was really wondering if anyone can recall an author publicly calling out Sott for editing their article.
I'm sure it's just sour grapes about having their article commented on by Sott editors, but apparently they were claiming it was edited. I've been reading Sott for ages and never noticed an article being edited and I often click through to the original.
I tried Googling for posts calling out Sott, but couldn't find anything.
Well, without a link to the specific article your wife was referring to, it's difficult to say or to address her comments.
I think in the past we have been asked to remove articles from our website, but not due to editing, simply due to certain sites being protective of their information or disagreeing with the other topics discussed on the page.
As far as the practice of publishing on SOTT, the idea isn't to edit the original that is used, what is used is editorial commenting on the articles, to clarify points, add context or information to expand on what is being said.
Sometimes that comment can become quite extensive, but it's not an edition of the original per se, it is adding context, even if it does change the way the original article looked. The original is always left intact.
I think in the past we have been asked to remove articles from our website, but not due to editing, simply due to certain sites being protective of their information or disagreeing with the other topics discussed on the page.
As far as the practice of publishing on SOTT, the idea isn't to edit the original that is used, what is used is editorial commenting on the articles, to clarify points, add context or information to expand on what is being said.
Sometimes that comment can become quite extensive, but it's not an edition of the original per se, it is adding context, even if it does change the way the original article looked. The original is always left intact.
To our knowledge, there has been NO instance of anyone calling SOTT out for editing an article.
There is nothing bad asking questions, hlat.
Carlos Alberto
The Force is Strong With This One
Maybe the issue was with SOTT modifying the original headline?
That certainly happens, and thankfully so.
Take for instance - NYT original.
Biden, Remaking Climate Team, Picks John Podesta to Guide Spending
SOTT (which links to the original)Birds of a feather: Biden, remaking climate team, picks John Podesta to guide spending
One thing that comes to mind is that when an article is translated to another language (which sometimes can be very tricky!) there might be some unintentional small changes. I remember receiving one comment (in the comment section) many years ago where someone was complaining about how my translation didn't accurately represent the original.