Quote:
Originally posted by leagleaze
The folks at amlaw [are mad about our] attacking the integrity of Ms. Smith.
|
As a former journalist I find this incredibly childish and wrong of AmLaw. It is one thing to write a trash piece; its quite another to then engage in a discussion defending it with the people you've trashed, even when they attempt to establish the dialog. The correct answer is simply, "We're sorry you were unhappy about our coverage. We would be happy to publish a letter to the editor so long as it meets the printed criteria for such letters" [which may include requiring signatures or no profanity, etc., I haven't looked at AmLaw's rules in particular]. And that's it.
If Ms. Smith is upset because she feels she was improperly maligned because of the editor's edits, that's an internal matter and/or she needs to grow up. If they are concerned about the fact they've now irritated a community of lawyers who will be reluctant to give quotes and information in the future, perhaps they should have thought about that earlier.
I for one, in the unlikely event I am ever contacted by Ms. Smith (or anyone else at AmLaw) will be reluctant to share any information, on or off the record.
