<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: When TMZ gets it wrong</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/12/29/when-tmz-gets-it-wrong/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/12/29/when-tmz-gets-it-wrong/</link>
	<description>Can you think of a better name?</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:19:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gilles</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/12/29/when-tmz-gets-it-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-111459</link>
		<dc:creator>Gilles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2009 20:30:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=7981#comment-111459</guid>
		<description>Well in the realm of paparazi journalism; TMZ (in comparison to similar outlets) does a pretty good and honorable job of reporting the goings on in the celebrity world in my view. Its all relative really.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well in the realm of paparazi journalism; TMZ (in comparison to similar outlets) does a pretty good and honorable job of reporting the goings on in the celebrity world in my view. Its all relative really.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fagstein</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/12/29/when-tmz-gets-it-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-111386</link>
		<dc:creator>Fagstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2009 05:40:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=7981#comment-111386</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t read TMZ. Unless there&#039;s some breaking celebrity news that I&#039;m supposed to follow for work, or (like in this case) a story from somewhere else points to it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don't read TMZ. Unless there's some breaking celebrity news that I'm supposed to follow for work, or (like in this case) a story from somewhere else points to it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fassero</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/12/29/when-tmz-gets-it-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-111371</link>
		<dc:creator>Fassero</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2009 02:21:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=7981#comment-111371</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s establish that TMZ is the product of our ever-increasing celebrity-obsessed culture. It&#039;s a given. It&#039;s pathetic. The problem is that the mainstream media has embraced it as much, if not more, than anybody else so the fact that they&#039;re spraying their jeans with this &quot;TMZ goofed&quot; story is playing more like a bunch of teenage boys comparing penis sizes in a gym shower. TMZ has broken tons of stories much like the blogsphere yet the mainstream media is envious of both mediums because this was once the stuff they excelled at themselves. 

Was the Kennedy story a flop/hoax? Absolutely. That still gives TMZ a better record on story accuracy than those who now choose to slay it. The difference is the bulk of TMZ&#039;s audience won&#039;t care. JFK has been dead for over forty years. TMZ&#039;s audience is more interested in which celebrity appeared at which restaurant-flavor-of-the-moment-in-LA. Heck, most of TMZ&#039;s audience in unlikely to know that JFK was once a President. 

All in due fairness, this blunder pales in comparison&#039;s to what happened at CBS which was far more scandalous because it was entirely aimed at smearing a present sitting President - nothing more; nothing less. Never mind that CBS spent months trying to defend it&#039;s story when it was painfully obvious there wasn&#039;t one whereas TMZ at least started to backtrack a few hours after they broke their story. 

And I don&#039;t completely hate TMZ. Quite frankly, they covered the Natasha Richardson death/accident far better than even the local media here. Also, and it&#039;s painfully obvious, they get barely an iota of their information from their own &quot;stalking&quot; camerapeople as much as they live off of tips from legal, medical, and political contacts who should know way better and, even worse, celebrity publicists who CRAVE for their clients to get the cheap exposure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let's establish that TMZ is the product of our ever-increasing celebrity-obsessed culture. It's a given. It's pathetic. The problem is that the mainstream media has embraced it as much, if not more, than anybody else so the fact that they're spraying their jeans with this "TMZ goofed" story is playing more like a bunch of teenage boys comparing penis sizes in a gym shower. TMZ has broken tons of stories much like the blogsphere yet the mainstream media is envious of both mediums because this was once the stuff they excelled at themselves. </p>
<p>Was the Kennedy story a flop/hoax? Absolutely. That still gives TMZ a better record on story accuracy than those who now choose to slay it. The difference is the bulk of TMZ's audience won't care. JFK has been dead for over forty years. TMZ's audience is more interested in which celebrity appeared at which restaurant-flavor-of-the-moment-in-LA. Heck, most of TMZ's audience in unlikely to know that JFK was once a President. </p>
<p>All in due fairness, this blunder pales in comparison's to what happened at CBS which was far more scandalous because it was entirely aimed at smearing a present sitting President - nothing more; nothing less. Never mind that CBS spent months trying to defend it's story when it was painfully obvious there wasn't one whereas TMZ at least started to backtrack a few hours after they broke their story. </p>
<p>And I don't completely hate TMZ. Quite frankly, they covered the Natasha Richardson death/accident far better than even the local media here. Also, and it's painfully obvious, they get barely an iota of their information from their own "stalking" camerapeople as much as they live off of tips from legal, medical, and political contacts who should know way better and, even worse, celebrity publicists who CRAVE for their clients to get the cheap exposure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wkh</title>
		<link>http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/12/29/when-tmz-gets-it-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-111350</link>
		<dc:creator>wkh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 23:20:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=7981#comment-111350</guid>
		<description>HAHAHA! YOU READ TMZ! 

You wrote:
Both involve documents that were authenticated but later turned out to be fakes.

Not exactly fake. Just not what they were purported to be. It was after all a real picture of a real man on a real boat with real naked women looking to be having a nice time (I&#039;d like to be there, with one of those real nice bodies). It just wasn&#039;t JFK. Mistaken identity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>HAHAHA! YOU READ TMZ! </p>
<p>You wrote:<br />
Both involve documents that were authenticated but later turned out to be fakes.</p>
<p>Not exactly fake. Just not what they were purported to be. It was after all a real picture of a real man on a real boat with real naked women looking to be having a nice time (I'd like to be there, with one of those real nice bodies). It just wasn't JFK. Mistaken identity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

