John Andrews is a Competitive Webmaster and Search Engine Optimization Consultant in Seattle, Washington. This is John Andrews blog on issues of interest to the SEO community and competitive webmasters. Want to know more?

johnon.com  Competitive Web & SEO

It’s Good Content, but is it “real”? Do you care?

The New York Times online is on a roll. I’m reading it again. Good writing, good stories, good photography, and (gasp!) hyperlink to other web sites! But as I admired this piece on a little foodie in New York City, I started to wonder. What kind of journalism is this now? Great photo. It tells a story. It’s actual photojournalism, which is so rare on the web. Then again… wait a sec… it’s a staged photo!

The story of a young boy in New York going on his own to a salumaria and sampling the offerings as a food critic… great story; very NY. And that photo! The lighting.. the faces… the movement of the server’s hand, the reflection from the window pane. Awesome photo… my only problem is, the photo credit is Michael Appleton… award winning photojournalist. There is no way he was there the day this story took place. So this must be a re-creation. A staged photo.

[Update: As Lea notes in the comments, the caption of the photo now says “on a subsequent visit to the Salumeria..”  I’ll gladly assume I missed that the first time, although the page is NOARCHIVE so I can’t look back to see if it was updated. It says the story was in the print edition November 17, 2008, on page A23 of the New York edition in case it matters. If I did miss that, much of this post is irrelevant…erroneous…. and so for now, I’m removing it. If it was changed, well, that’ll be a story for another day.

★★ Click to share this article:   Digg this     Create a del.icio.us Bookmark     Add to Newsvine

One Response to “It’s Good Content, but is it “real”? Do you care?”

  1. Lea de Groot Says:

    Have they updated the New York Times story?? Did you cause enough controversy to move *The New York TImes*? I’m impressed ;)

    The photo credit now makes it clear its staged – ‘on a subsequent visit’. Hmmph…