New York Times Article

[Trouble]

Because Salt Lake City newspaper is lazy and they thought that they could post it! Well, that is so not cool! They thought they were posting something worthwhile when in fact they didn't!

[jsharp]

How come the Salt Lake Tribune didn't have one of their own staff write about Celtic Woman, and what possessed them to use the New York Times article?  They did attribute it to the same columnist (and I use the term loosely) and cited the New York Times, so it's not plagiarism.

I don't read newspapers regularly, and this is a large part of why I don't.  Is this standard practice in the Newspaper industry?

I know most of these questions are somewhat hypothetical, but I had to ask.

The newspaper business is in rough times. There are fewer papers and the ones that are still around can't affor as many writers on staff. More and more of what they print is wire service material and syndicated columns like that one. The smaller the market, the truer this is.

The Salt Lake paper had to pay to run this article (unless it's owned by the NYT - they own scores of them).

[Charlie'sAngels]

I read it and was disgusted at the pole remark too. But I ONLY read it because it was about Celtic Woman..I hate the NYTimes, and so do many  who no longer subscribe.
The short time I've been a fan (since discovering them), I have found them to be the absolute classiest ladies and professionals in existence, not to mention they can sorta sing, too...

[fireyred09]

...not to mention they can sorta sing, too...

They do seem to have a knack for that, huh? 

[Cash]

Sorry I didnt read this when it was first posted. Some good points raised here for discussion.

1. I agree that the attractiveness plays a role, but is not dispositive, in the success of CW. For example, that 'fateful' day as I channel surfed onto the ANJ pledge drive special, it was Lisa I first noticed who lured me initially in. I was like "whoa whose that?!" Lisa does have a sort of radiance about her.  But it was Hayley's voice that hooked me. Sounds cliche maybe, but it goes right to the soul. And as for Mairead, she has unique ability that isnt duplicated. I have never thought of what she does as even close to pole dancing. Thats a real stretch. Maybe I am getting old, I dont know.

2. Some have made comments about the print media, but I think this issue encompuses the overall status of media today. They need ratings. Thats one thing I have said to others about Ann Coulter. Does she really believe the stuff she says, or is she casting a sort of role. Sort of like those 'rasslers on cable tv, on Monday Night Raw or Smackdown. Its a public character to project. I remember one night Bill O'Reilly interveiwed Coulter and was even critical, and Ann responded with something like "There have been thousands of well educated experts who have said what I say but only sell a dozen books, I have sold hundreds of thousands" Bill responded "No question you have a strong following" I even taped this, and it really just stuck in my mind. So it seems the writer of this article purposely did this in order to get all this attention.

3. Because of that, maybe it is better that the writer be ignored. I can see the argument for that. I also can understand the forum banning negative things about the ladies, because fights over that stuff can lead to big trouble with forum members. One objective here seems to keep a peace and harmony going and avoid trouble, thus to quickly remove anything negative that could cause tension. I have seen even little minor things erupt into major trouble on other web groups, so there is a lot of logic that makes sense here.
At the same time, you cant just stick your head in the sand either. Bad things dont go away if they are ignored or appeased. So by having it brought up on the forum, to let us know, but to not promote it further by leaving it posted, is perhaps the right way to go. However, I do intend to find this and read it. I feel a bit uncomfortable responding to it before reading it, but I also have enough confidence from what I have read from you all to make the statments I have. However, I would never respond further, say outside the forum or contact the NYTs, unless I read it personally. thats where it would be good if the link was left on the forum. Quick and easy for forum members to find it and read.

[Cash]

If you would like to read the article, please go to the New York Times Website. 

They want paid for it. No way I am gonna do that. Does anyone have a link to it? I know you may not want to post in the forum, but you could PM it to me. If not, I will try to go do some library research. Shouldnt take too long to find the NYT at the public library.

Thanks.

[logalogalog]

Cash,I have the link.If you really want to read it,pm me.

[Jason]

After reading the first few posts in this thread.. myself, there's no way I'd want to read this article

[Jim M.]

I googled CW and found and read the review.  I think the writer is typical of many current media/news people: ignorant and lazy.  Typical of the NYT.   

[Colleen]

It's times like these when I hate the fact that I'm naturally curious. I found the article online and was more disgusted than anything else. I could understand if the writer was critiquing the music, some people just don't like the kind of music Celtic Woman sings and I respect that. But to say the things the writer said? That's just low. One of the many reasons I don't like the media today.