This is a tangled web, so stay alert.
In recent months, billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman has publicly insisted that his alma mater, Harvard University, fire President Claudine Gay. Part of her complaint involved the fact that Gay had been accused of plagiarism in her career. Gay eventually resigned.
Then, last week, Business Insider published articles accusing Neri Oxman, a former professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, of plagiarism, adding from Wikipedia more than a dozen times in her thesis. One headline read: “Celebrity Academic Neri Oxman Plagiarized From Wikipedia, Academics, Textbooks, and Other Resources Without Any Attribution. “
So here’s where it gets interesting. Oxman is married to Ackman, who is now furious with Business Insider and accuses him of bad journalism. And Business Insider’s parent company is listening.
In a social media post, Ackman accused Business Insider’s sources of being from MIT. In another lengthy article on X, Ackman wrote that the editor of Business Insider’s research organization is “an infamous anti-Zionist. “My wife is Israeli. This may be why he was willing to bring this attack to light and why others rejected the source while searching for a media outlet.
He also accused Business Insider of violating a “sacred code” by attacking a member of a tough person’s family circle.
The story took another turn on Sunday when Benjamin Mullin of The New York Times tweeted a message from Business Insider’s parent company, Germany’s Axel Springer, who said he was looking into the matter, though nothing in the story seems to be wrong. .
The note read, in part: “While the facts of the reports have been questioned, questions have been raised in recent days about the motivation and procedure that led to the report, issues that we take very seriously. “
He added: “We will take a few days to review the processes around those stories to make sure our journalistic criteria and values have been respected. We will be transparent with our findings.
The Washington Post’s Will Sommer reported that Business Insider executives were “surprised” by Springer’s statement.
Sommer wrote: “In an email sent to workers Sunday afternoon and reviewed by The Washington Post, Business Insider’s global editor-in-chief, Nicholas Carlson, gave the impression of rejecting the idea that the articles needed editing. Carlson wrote that he would “welcome” the criticism, but defended the media price tag for the articles given Oxman’s position as a “recognized academic” and founder of startups.
Carlson wrote, “I have asked for those two stories to be published. I stay true to our history and the work it has entailed. I know our procedure very well. I know that the motivations of our editorial staff are facts and responsibility.
So why would Axel Springer make such a fuss over a story that is factual and newsworthy?It may simply be that Axel Springer fears that stories about Oxman will be considered anti-Semitic or anti-Zionist.
Sommer notes that Axel Springer “supports Israel openly in a way that would be unusual for a nonpartisan American media firm. Axel Springer employees in Germany — though not at its U.S. properties — must sign a mission statement that affirms Israel’s right to exist, among other issues. In 2021, the Israeli flag flew for a week in front of the company’s offices after (CEO Mathias) Döpfner mandated it as a statement against antisemitism, telling anyone who had a problem with the flag to leave the company.”
Ackman also complained that he and his wife had had enough time to respond to the report, saying they only had 90 minutes.
In the end, it turns out that Oxman did precisely what Ackman criticized Gay for, and Oxman goes so far as to become a public figure whose plagiarism interests readers.
But, writes Semafor’s Max Tani, “the controversy comes at an attractive time for Business Insider. The company recently added the term “Business” to its name, in an effort to bring the logo back to its roots. There is concern that reports like Oxman’s last week could damage BI’s reputation in the eyes of some potential professional readers. The company has come under attack from a number of right-wing business figures in recent years, adding Ackman, Elon Musk and David Portnoy, thanks to critical reports the outlet has published about their private lives.
(For the record, Ackman tweeted this week that he’s a “centrist. “)
At the end of the day, it turns out that even if Axel Springer comes back and says he supports Business Insider’s reporting, the bridges between BI and its parent company will need some serious repairs.
CNN’s Sara Sidner, featured here this month at CNN Heroes: An All-Star Tribute at the American Museum of Natural History in New York. (Evan Agostini/Invision/AP)
CNN anchor Sara Sidner announced on air Monday that she is being treated for stage 3 breast cancer. While hosting “CNN News Central,” Sidner told viewers, “I’ve never been in bad health for a single day in my life. I don’t smoke, I rarely drink. Breast cancer runs in my family. And yet, here I am with level 3 breast cancer. It’s hard to say out loud.
Holding back tears, Sidner went on to say that she was in her second month of chemotherapy and would undergo radiation treatment and a double mastectomy.
Sidner, 51, said, “Stage 3 is not a death sentence anymore for the vast majority of women, but here is the reality that really shocked my system when I started to research more about breast cancer, something I never knew before this diagnosis: If you happen to be a Black woman, you are 41% more likely to die from breast cancer than your white counterparts. Forty-one percent. So to all my sisters, Black and white and brown out there, please for the love of God get your mammogram every single year. Do your self-exams. Try to catch it before I did.”
In an interview with People’s Kyler Alvord, Sidner said he didn’t tell anyone about this when he was first diagnosed because he needed time to process the news. After jumping into the worst-case scenario in her head, Sidner told Alvord that she then told herself not to give up and said, “I just made a decision. I said, “No, you’re going to live, you’re going to avoid this, and you’re going to do everything in your power. arsenal for this one. Period. ‘And since then, I’ve been much happier in my life. . . I mean, happier than before cancer.
Although she says she feels tired and moves a little slower, Sidner hasn’t missed a single day of work.
Sidner said, “I’m living and I’m loving living because I know it can be short. I don’t know how this is going to end … (but) we have the ability to feel joy at any point as long as we’re breathing.”
If you were expecting ESPN’s Pat McAfee to retract his claims that a top ESPN executive was looking to sabotage his screen, you’re not very familiar with McAfee. As I wrote on Monday, McAfee pointed the finger at Norby Williamson, ESPN’s editor-in-chief. and head of events and studio production, for leaking to the media what McAfee claims are false data on viewership figures, and claimed that Williamson was looking to paint the screen in bad light.
McAfee made those comments right after the ESPN portion of his show ended, and the rest was streamed on ESPN and YouTube. On Monday’s show, McAfee said he was surprised that his comments went viral because they weren’t on ESPN’s linear channel.
Not that he regrets it.
McAfee said, “The only thing that depresses me is that this is a guy that we really like. . . (ESPN President) Burke Magnus, who lately is the new head of ESPN just below (president) Jimmy Pitaro. I guess sí. se made to look bad by what I did and the way I did it. I need everyone to know that we love Burke Magnus. And I also love Jimmy Pitaro. I love (Disney CEO) Bob Iger. But there’s a total transition here from the old to the new.
Last week’s comments made a lot of noise, even though ESPN officially downplayed all of that and said it was an internal matter and that it supported Williamson and McAfee. But McAfee then doubled down on Monday, saying, “A lot of other people say I’m looking to get fired. Of course not. Indeed, there are other people you don’t like, that’s for sure. And they don’t like us, that’s how it’s going to be. And I’m not going to take anything away from it. From what I said about this person, but in terms of the overall story of us and ESPN, I think other people want to remember: We’re strong, we’re strong, baby. And we all understand what the future will look like, there are only a few old witches who potentially don’t know.
For this article I entrusted it to Rick Edmonds, analyst at Poynter Media.
The news industry suffered a sharp drop in traffic from Facebook and X around the world last year. Executives don’t expect an improvement in 2024, making them pessimistic about the monetary outlook and worried that this year won’t be a smart year for journalism. .
These are the key findings of the Reuters Oxford Institute’s latest report, “Trends and Forecasts,” based on a survey of 314 executives in 56 countries and released on Tuesday. Specifically:
Nic Newman, lead author of the report, commented in a press release: “It’s getting harder and harder to succeed with online audiences. . . The big concern is that search traffic will be next, as AI-based effects provide answers directly in the interface, rather than providing so many links to news sites.
Jo Koy, arriving at the 81st Golden Globe Awards on Sunday at the Beverly Hilton in Beverly Hills, Calif. (Photo by Jordan Strauss/Invision/AP)
The CBS Golden Globes telecast on Sunday night averaged 9. 4 million viewers, up 50% from a year ago and the highest viewership since 2020. But the screen and presenter Jo Koy have been widely criticized by critics. Alison of Variety Herman wrote, “As it turns out, this year’s Globes were still a crisis, but not the kind we like to see. Lasting just over 3 hours, the rite was effective on paper, but seemed endless in practice. With forced, poorly crafted jokes and a woefully unqualified MC, this year’s showcase is not a triumphant comeback, let alone a showcase for new and advanced Golden Globes.
Koy’s opening monologue was pretty flat, so much so that he expressed it as he did it, telling the star-studded audience, “I got the gig 10 days ago!Want the best monologue? Hey, up close. You. “Are you kidding me? Slowly, I’ve written a few, and those are the ones you’re laughing at.
Koy admitted on Monday’s “GMA 3” on ABC that the night was a mixed bag and he was stung by some of the criticism. He said, “I had fun. You know, it was a moment that I’ll always remember. It’s a tough room. It was a hard job, I’m not going to lie … I’d be lying if (I said) it doesn’t hurt. I hit a moment there where I was like, ‘Ah.’ Hosting is just a tough gig. Yes, I’m a stand-up comic but that hosting position it’s a different style. I kind of went in and did the writer’s thing. We had 10 days to write this monologue. It was a crash course. I feel bad, but I got to still say I loved what I did.”
The only joke that made a thud wasn’t such a bad remark. He said: “As you know, we came here after a double-header of football. The big difference between the Golden Globes and the NFL?At the Golden Globes, we have fewer shots here of Taylor Swift, I swear.
The camera then panned to Swift, who didn’t even smile as she took a sip of champagne, a scene that will actually be a meme.
When asked Monday if there were any times he felt bad, Koy replied, “I think it was when Taylor’s was a little flat. . . I guess it was a weird joke. But it was more about the NFL. . . He was looking to make the NFL laugh through cuts and the fact that the Globes didn’t have to do that. So it was more of an opportunity for the NFL. But it just didn’t work out that way.
The New York Times’ opinion section is being questioned over a 5,000-word essay — “Look What We Made Taylor Swift Do” — by opinion editor Anna Marks. The piece speculated on whether Swift, because of various hints in her music and videos and other work, might actually be queer.
Marks wrote in her piece, “In isolation, a single dropped hairpin is perhaps meaningless or accidental, but considered together, they’re the unfurling of a ballerina bun after a long performance. Those dropped hairpins began to appear in Ms. Swift’s artistry long before queer identity was undeniably marketable to mainstream America. They suggest to queer people that she is one of us.”
Marks also wrote, “Whether she is conscious of it or not, Ms. Swift signals to queer people — in the language we use to communicate with one another — that she has some affinity for queer identity. There are some queer people who would say that through this sort of signaling, she has already come out, at least to us. But what about coming out in a language the rest of the public will understand?”
(Admittedly, I’ve settled on a few passages, so to be fair, read the essay yourself. )
Swift is best friends with the LGBTQ community, but she is known as a member of that community.
One user believed to be close to Swift’s camp told CNN’s Oliver Darcy: “Because of her enormous success, there is a Taylor-shaped hole in people’s ethics right now. This article would not have been allowed to be written about Shawn Mendes or any male artist. ” whose sexuality has been questioned by her fans. It turns out there’s no line some sleuths won’t cross when writing about Taylor, no matter how intrusive, disingenuous and off-base it may be, all under the protective veil of an “opinion piece. “
Many were surprised that the New York Times would write such an article, and even Marks realized the retaliation he could face. She wrote in the essay, “I know that discussing the prospect of a star’s oddity before a formal declaration of identity seems, to some, too lewd and gossip-fueled to merit discussion. “
Marks later added, “I share a lot of those reservations. But the stories that dominate our collective mind shape what our culture allows artists and their audiences to say and be. Every time an artist denounces homosexuality and that transmission falls on deaf ears, that sign disappears. Acknowledging the choice of being queer – while being aware of the difference between choice and certainty – helps to keep this sign alive.
Do you have any comments or advice? Email Tom Jones, Poynter’s senior media editor, at tjones@poynter. org.
The Poynter Report is our press release. To receive it in your inbox Monday through Friday, sign up here.