Creative Editing
In the NY Times, no less. Do you think the meaning of Corporal Starr's words changes when you add back the excised portions?
« How Should Libby Be Punished? | Main | Confabulation »
In the NY Times, no less. Do you think the meaning of Corporal Starr's words changes when you add back the excised portions?
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b80969e200e55068092a8833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Creative Editing:
The comments to this entry are closed.
I find this a little baffling. The Times said he strongly supported the war; the unabridged letter confirms that.
Posted by: jpe | Oct 28, 2005 at 07:18 PM
True enough, if you read and digest fully all 4600+ words. But truncating the letter where they did leaves the impression that the letter was mainly about his premonition of his own death, whereas the full letter makes it much more about the value of his work in Iraq as he saw it.
Posted by: Giacomo | Oct 28, 2005 at 10:01 PM
"What media bias?"
The next time I hear that, I think I'm gonna hurl!
Posted by: Mr. Right | Oct 29, 2005 at 02:41 PM