Err, yes, well,

The New York Times has issued a correction after its television writer panned a show for being confusing when he watched the first two episodes in the wrong order.

I always get the feeling that they’ve done the same to their economics books myself.

7 thoughts on “Err, yes, well,”

  1. Is there any point in TV reviewers, especially with regards to Amazon?

    The point of critics is to give a buyer some idea of whether they should spend their money on a thing. Or in the case of TV, whether to tune into a thing rather than another thing.

    But Amazon shows are on-demand. You can just click and watch for free.

  2. But Amazon shows are on-demand. You can just click and watch for free.

    And they have an in-built rating system: something with just one or two stars (with a sufficiently high number of ratings) is probably going to be shit, something with 5 might be worth a look.

  3. @ Rob
    They don’t believe that they ever need to apologise for anything – freedom of the press gives it superiority over the other three estates (in their eyes).

  4. Bloke in Costa Rica

    The perennial theme: these people tout themselves as gatekeepers, as arbiters of opinion, as the elite whose erudition is such that we should defer to them in all things. In reality they’re usually third-rate herd animals whose cultural refinement is threadbare at best. I’d no more ask a New York Times journalist his opinion of a TV show than I’d ask an Airedale Terrier its opinion on the Hodge conjecture.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *