Lakers writer Mike Bresnahan says the Lakers' 5-0 record since the All-Star break is their best winning streak since early- to mid-January. Can they keep it up Friday vs. Charlotte? They've lost eight of their last 10 against the Bobcats.
Chat about it with Bresnahan at 2:30 p.m. Friday. The chat will take place in the box below...
Clippers writer Lisa Dillman, who first reported details of the Baron Davis trade late Wednesday night and even broke the news to him outside the locker room, will be chatting with readers at 3 p.m. Friday.
Dillman reported Thursday on the early reaction to the trade from the Clippers and in Cleveland.
During the chat, Dillman will give more insights into the trade, including how Mo Williams will fit, and will break down Friday night's game vs. the Lakers.
The chat will take place in the box below...
Photo: Baron Davis reacts after being called for a foul Jan. 31 against the Bucks. Credit: Wally Skalij/Los Angeles Times
A scroll through a newsy Twitter feed this morning as Libya’s leader addressed his country would’ve looked something like this:
Los Angeles Times:
LIBYA: German Chancellor Angela Merkel calls Kadafi speech 'frightening' http://lat.ms/hrksdD
New York Times:
Qaddafi’s Grip Falters as His Forces Take On Protesters http://nyti.ms/hkrpaz
Washington Post:
Gaddafi: Protesters were given "hallucination pills" by outside groups http://wapo.st/eD4zvx #Libya
Associated Press:
An interactive timeline of the Gadhafi regime: http://apne.ws/ew0tDx -ldh
Those are all about the same person.
The man whose name the Los Angeles Times spells as Moammar Kadafi is Muammer el-Qaddafi in the New York Times, Moammar Gaddafi in the Washington Post and Moammar Gadhafi in Associated Press articles.
It’s no wonder readers think the L.A. Times has a mistake.
Yure Kolaric sent a friendly e-mail on Sunday: "Hi! You have written Kadafi instead of Gadafi on the front page."
On Tuesday's article about Kadafi's speech, an online commenter called ScrewyWabbit was less forgiving: "Kadafi?? At least get the name correct! LOL Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libya for the correct name. It's Muammar GADDAFI. Jeez!"
Just as there's more than one way to skin a wabbit –- er, rabbit -– there's more than one way to spell the Libyan leader's name. All of the spellings are transliterations from Arabic, and so all are interpretations.
The L.A. Times has used Kadafi since 1969, when the colonel seized power. The LAT's first comprehensive stylebook, printed in 1979, explained the reasoning:
Khadafi, Kadafy, Qadafi, Kadafi:
These varying transliterations of the name of the Libyan leader sum up many of The Times' problems with Arabic. They represent different, though similar, pronunciations.
For The Times' purposes, let us make it Kadafi, and let us apply the same principle to other Arab names:
a k rather than a kh or a q
an i rather than a y
(This also explains The Times' spelling of Koran, as opposed to AP's preferred spelling, Quran.)
Over on the Opinion L.A. blog, Paul Whitefield points out that The Times is in the minority in its spelling. The winner in Google hits? Wikipedia’s spelling: Muammar al-Gaddafi.
Maybe ScrewyWabbit was on to something.
--Deirdre Edgar
[For the record, Feb. 23: An earlier version of this post misspelled the New York Times' spelling of el-Qaddafi as el-Quaddafi.]
Times Editor Russ Stanton sent the following memo to the newsroom, congratulating Jeff Gottlieb, Ruben Vives and the staff for their reporting on the city of Bell:
Congratulations to Jeff, Ruben and the 25-plus-member Bell crew, who tonight were named winners in the local reporting category in the 61st annual George Polk Awards.
The judges called the reporting "explosive," noting that city officials were receiving some of the highest salaries in the country despite the fact that they were leading one of the poorest cities in Los Angeles County, and that they had bilked residents of millions of dollars and secretly enriched themselves, even as they cut services and fired workers. As you know, eight current or former city officials have been arrested on corruption charges, and the state controller's office has ordered municipalities to post the salaries of officials on the Internet.
The Polks, one of the most prestigious awards programs in journalism, are named after the former CBS News correspondent, who was killed while covering the civil war in Greece in 1948. They are administered by Long Island University.
Tonight's award is the 18th won by the Los Angeles Times since the Polk program began in 1949. Five other current staffers are previous Polk winners: Paul Pringle for labor reporting in 2008, Ken Weiss for environmental reporting in 2006, Carolyn Cole for photojournalism in 2004, Don Bartletti in the international category in 2002 and Tracy Wilkinson for foreign reporting in 1998. In addition, this newsroom’s staff won awards for political reporting in 1996 for tracing funding from Asian sources to the coffers of the Democratic National Committee, some of which was in violation of federal law, and for local reporting in 1992 for coverage of the Los Angeles riots.
Times Lakers writer Mike Bresnahan will hold court from 10:30-noon Friday in a live "mega chat."
Topics: This weekend's All-Star Game, Thursday's trade deadline, the Time Warner TV deal, Wednesday night's loss to the Cavs and whatever else is on readers' minds.
The chat will take place in the box below...
Times Editor Russ Stanton announced the following awards in a note to the newsroom:
Congratulations to "Team Bell" and photographer Barbara Davidson on well-earned recognition from the American Society of News Editors.
Team Bell won the ASNE Distinguished Writing Award for Local Accountability Reporting for exposing exorbitant salaries and flagrant financial abuses in the city of Bell. Barbara won in the Community Service Photojournalism category for her moving portraits of victims of gang violence.
The Los Angeles Times was the only news organization to win more than one award.
The judges cited our Bell entry, "Breach of Faith," for its "relentless reporting on the shockingly exorbitant salaries paid to officials of the small suburban city of Bell, Calif., and on those officials' arrogant disregard for the public welfare."
Team Bell, as you know, began with Jeff Gottlieb and Ruben Vives and quickly expanded to include about one-quarter of the Metro staff. The coverage, which is now in its eighth month, has led to the arrest of eight current and former officials, millions of dollars in tax refunds and tough new disclosure requirements for California cities.
Barbara's project, "Victims of Gang Violence," ran over three days in December. It produced a stunning series of images charting the suffering and perseverance of innocent people caught up in gang violence.
The ASNE judges praised her "absorbing examination of the effects of gang violence on the innocent: those wounded or killed because of a quarrel in which they had no part, victims lying in hospital beds or relatives and friends standing by their loved ones' coffins or sitting all alone asking, 'Why?' Though Davidson's wrenching photographs cannot answer their question, they are a masterful reminder that gang violence is not just hoodlum against hoodlum but a very real threat to those who would have no part of it but are not given a choice."
In addition, Christopher Goffard was a finalist in the Non-Deadline Writing category for "Four Walls and a Bed," his gripping series on L.A’s hard-core homeless.
ASNE officials said the 2010 contest was one of the most competitive in recent memory, with a 30% increase in the number of entries from last year. The awards will be presented at the organization’s convention in San Diego in April.
News of CBS News reporter Lara Logan’s sexual assault while covering the demonstrations in Egypt drew an immediate response when the story broke Tuesday afternoon.
Fellow journalists spread the news on Twitter with remarks such as "horrible" and "so scary."
But as a writer for Salon noted, there quickly were bloggers and online commenters who blamed Logan for the attack.
Early this morning, NPR published a blog post explaining that many comments on their story about the assault had been removed because they violated NPR's discussion rules. The post went on to state what some of those rules are.
The Times has had a similar experience with its article about Logan. This morning, reader engagement editor Martin Beck posted a note in the discussion section of the Logan story saying that comments would now be moderated:
MartinBeckLAT at 7:30 AM February 16, 2011
Note to readers and commenters: Because of the sensitivity of this issue and repeated inappropriate posts, we will review comments on this article before they are posted. We have also removed comments that violated our terms of service.
Since April, The Times has had a policy of allowing comments on articles to post live -- that is, without approval by a person. As the memo announcing the change explained, comments are "scrubbed against a word filter, which will block an extensive list of vulgarities." Users have been encouraged to police the system by flagging offensive comments with the "Report Abuse" button.
However, on a handful of occasions, editors have decided to moderate the comments on a sensitive article. Other recent articles for which comments were moderated include a December Column One about gay homeless teens and one earlier this month about a Mormon elder's remarks on religious freedom.
Several readers have been put off by the decision. Beck said, "We prefer to allow commenters to have discussions in real time because it makes for better conversation. But if necessary we will step in to calm the waters, and we won't allow hateful comments or personal attacks."
Elsewhere on latimes.com, an Opinion L.A. post about Logan has drawn its share of offending remarks. "It's not just blame-the-victim/she-should-have-known-better screeds, it's pretty virulent anti-Muslim stuff," said editorial writer Jon Healey, who has been moderating comments on the post.
"Ideally, comment boards are self-policing. When readers submit something outrageous, others call them on it," Healey said. "Sometimes, though, the comment boards just get overwhelmed with stuff that’s demeaning or hateful, and that drives readers with contrary viewpoints away. And sometimes people will post comments that so clearly violate our terms of service that we simply have to take their words down.
"Usually, though, whether something is offensive is a judgment call, which is why I prefer to let readers crack down on those who they think have crossed the line."
As a reminder, the Discussion FAQ, which is posted at the bottom of each article, includes these examples of comments that are inappropriate:
-- Deirdre Edgar
Entertainment coverage was prominent in Twitter users' comments about the Los Angeles Times over the last week. Egypt and Lindsay Lohan were among the other stories that drew mentions -- not all of them positive.
As Tiffany Hsu reported in Tuesday's Business section, Jimmy Orr has been named managing editor, online, to oversee its Web news operations and its expanding portfolio of digital and mobile news properties.
Orr, 45, who is currently deputy editor, online, will assume his new duties Feb. 28. He will replace Sean Gallagher, who is leaving The Times and relocating to London.
Editor Russ Stanton's memo with the announcement follows:
The Times has released the following statement in response to criticism of its Grading the Teachers project:
The Times has received several inquiries from readers about a study done at the University of Colorado’s National Education Policy Center regarding our series “Grading the Teachers.” In public statements, policy center officials have argued that the study invalidates a Times analysis of the effectiveness of some 6,000 elementary school teachers in the Los Angeles Unified School District. The policy center’s research does no such thing. Its study, released last week, shows only that their analysis, using somewhat different data and assumptions than we used, produced results somewhat different from our own.
In its press releases, officials of the policy center have claimed that this discredits our work -- that the center’s analysis is right and therefore ours is wrong. This assertion does not stand up to scrutiny.
Value-added analysis involves taking hundreds of thousands of student test scores and analyzing them to determine how much of each student’s academic growth can be attributed to his or her teacher, controlling for factors that are beyond a teacher’s control such as poverty, the educational background of a student’s parents and class size. It is a powerful tool for accountability, providing a way to compare one teacher’s performance in the classroom with another’s. Experts in the field differ widely about how to do the analysis -- which variables mathematical terms to crank into the equations and how much weight to give them. Over a period of more than a year’s work, The Times consulted many experts, then chose one experienced researcher, Richard Buddin of the RAND Corp., to conduct the analysis.
After receiving Buddin’s analysis, The Times shared it with leading researchers, including skeptics of value added methods, and incorporated their input. Our reporters then tested the results in the real world, visiting classrooms across Los Angeles to observe and interview teachers.
The policy center’s researchers did an analysis using a different formula and not surprisingly came up with different results. On that basis, the policy center’s publication director, Alex Molnar, has made the sweeping and false claim that the data used by The Times’ is “simply not capable of producing the teacher ratings” that we have published. That assertion comes despite the fact that the center’s analysis actually correlates with The Times’ work in the vast majority of cases.
Mr. Molnar’s claim boils down to this: Until a perfect value-added system is developed that everyone agrees upon, nothing should be published. We reject that idea.
We have said repeatedly in our stories and in our database that value-added analysis is not a perfect system. As we have written, even its strongest advocates say value-added should not be the sole measure of a teacher’s performance. But even as an imperfect system, it is far more rigorous, objective and useful to parents and others than current evaluations, in which an administrator typically spends a few minutes observing a class then fills out a short form on which well over 90% of teachers are rated “satisfactory.” The value-added method works particularly well to identify the two groups that one most would want to single out -- the most effective teachers and the least. This is information that we feel strongly the public should have access to.
Although the policy center’s statements imply that it analyzed exactly the same data that Buddin analyzed for The Times, its study in fact used 93,000 fewer student records, some 15% of the total. Why those records were excluded from their study is unknown -- the policy center’s researchers have not disclosed how they went about their work -- nor can it be determined what effect it had on their results.
The policy center’s researchers also based some of their conclusions on a different pool of teachers than the ones for whom we published scores. Their study analyzed scores for some 11,000 teachers, whereas we published only about 6,000 scores. We did not publish scores for any instructor who had taught fewer than 60 students -- a decision we made to enhance the reliability of the analysis. The lead researcher for the policy center’s study, Derek Briggs, told us in an e-mail last week that the 60-student minimum we used “serves to mitigate” some of his concerns about our analysis. But the policy center has not acknowledged that fact publicly.
Finally, a major source of funds for the policy center is the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice, a foundation set up by the National Education Association and six major Midwestern teacher unions affiliates. The NEA was one of the teacher union groups that backed an unsuccessful call for a boycott of The Times when “Grading the Teachers” was first published.
Although the policy center presents itself as a source of neutral scientific research, the language of their public statements has been anything but dispassionate, including a call for The Times not only to remove “Grading the Teachers” from our website, but to “apologize” for our work.
For years, school districts around the country, as well as academic experts, have conducted value-added analyses of teacher performance which they have kept secret. With “Grading the Teachers,” we put this information before the public, with ample explanation of the method’s limitations. That, we submit, is exactly what a newspaper should do. Mr. Molnar would like to put this information back behind locked doors. We disagree.
The Times has been covering the historic events in Egypt that began Jan. 25 with demonstrations in Tahrir Square and led to the resignation of President Hosni Mubarak on Friday.
Readers who have been following the reporting have appreciated the depth of coverage. Tony Ransdell of West Hills is one who wrote to The Times:
“I don't know how you have been able to produce the in-depth, insightful editorial coverage of the momentous events in Egypt that you've accomplished over the past couple of weeks,” he wrote. “This is an example of why the Los Angeles Times is still a great newspaper. Thank you for doing your job so superbly!”
Charity B. Gourley of Santa Barbara is another reader who e-mailed to say thank you:
“From the first day of this drama, the L.A. Times sent numerous journalists to cover events from a variety of perspectives. These journalists not only risked their own safety to record history as it was happening, but their writings were extraordinarily lucid and brilliant,” she wrote. “Thanks also to the staff at home who undoubtedly labored overtime behind the scenes to get these concise reports to your readers.”
Editor Russ Stanton acknowledged the staff involved in the coverage in a note to the newsroom Saturday. As he noted, The Times’ coverage of Egypt did not begin Jan. 25; Cairo bureau chief Jeffrey Fleishman has been reporting from the country for three years. And as Gourley guessed, there is a large cast working behind the scenes to produce the coverage.
Following is Stanton’s memo to the newsroom:
An article in last Monday’s Times has come under fire from critics who say it misrepresents the results of a review of the “value-added analysis” of L.A. Unified teachers that was published in print and online last August.
The review, conducted by the National Education Policy Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder, looked at the LAUSD data that The Times used in its “Grading the Teachers” series. The Feb. 7 article by Jason Felch said the review “confirms the broad conclusions of a Times analysis of teacher effectiveness in the Los Angeles Unified School District while raising concerns about the precision of the ratings.”
The policy center issued a news release taking issue with the article, saying its researchers believed The Times’ teacher-effectiveness ratings were based on “unreliable and invalid research.” Therefore, the release continued, the study “confirms very few of The Times’ conclusions.”
Several readers e-mailed The Times, questioning the reporting.
The article “distorted the study's findings for self-serving purposes,” said one reader.
“It smacks of either shock journalism or a deliberate attempt to mislead the public on behalf of big business and privatizers,” said another.
Readers raised two basic questions about the Colorado study and The Times’ handling of it: Did the article accurately reflect the findings of the study? Does the study invalidate the “Grading the Teachers” series?
| Advertisement |
|
|
