|
|
Do you think Gus is out to get Scott because he really is a bad reporter or because he just does not like him? Why do you think the higher ups like Scott and think he is doing a great job? Or are they just trying to find a "Yes Man" to groom as an editor?
|
Posts:
276
Registered:
11/11/07
|
|
(33 of 33)
May 15, 2008 12:24 PM
|
> I don't believe Gus was out to get Scott, he
> initially just wanted him to own up to the lies he
> was telling. I remember an incident that happened at
> the Washington Post in which a young female writer
> ran a spread about a juvenile drug addict. She won a
> Pulitzer for journalism. When it was discovered that
> the story was completely nothing but pure fiction,
> she not only had to return that award but was
> completely discredited as a journalist. What became
> of her is anybodies quess. Now this raises 2
> questions: Just how accurate and HONEST is the news
> really. For every one journalist that is caught
> fabricating the news and or using purple prose,how
> many are not? An unnamed politician summed it up
> best: while on a flight from LA to DC, a fight
> attendant asked him were some discarded news papers
> in the seat next to him trash. His answer was,"yes
> it's trash, but I read it anyway".
>
> --
> Edited by brigand at 03/14/2008 6:43 AM
I agree, Gus wasnt out to get Scott until he smelled the lie and the smell kept getting stronger. I think when he saw the "big wigs" latching onto his lies that is when he knew he had to follow his instincts.
As for your story about the female journalist who was busted, I'm curious about what, if anything, happened to her boss? Makes you wonder if there were any Gus' who may have smelled something funny with her.
|
|
|
Posts:
42
Registered:
1/24/08
|
|
(32 of 33)
Mar 14, 2008 9:41 AM
|
I don't believe Gus was out to get Scott, he initially just wanted him to own up to the lies he was telling. I remember an incident that happened at the Washington Post in which a young female writer ran a spread about a juvenile drug addict. She won a Pulitzer for journalism. When it was discovered that the story was completely nothing but pure fiction, she not only had to return that award but was completely discredited as a journalist. What became of her is anybodies quess. Now this raises 2 questions: Just how accurate and HONEST is the news really. For every one journalist that is caught fabricating the news and or using purple prose,how many are not? An unnamed politician summed it up best: while on a flight from LA to DC, a fight attendant asked him were some discarded news papers in the seat next to him trash. His answer was,"yes it's trash, but I read it anyway".
--
Edited by brigand at 03/14/2008 6:43 AM
|
|
|
Posts:
15
Registered:
12/5/06
|
|
(31 of 33)
Mar 13, 2008 2:27 AM
|
Gus wasn't 'out to get' Scott until he smelled the lie in his stories. The reason it got 'personal' for Gus is because Gus seemed more like an idealist (in a good way), and Scott cleaning up quotes and kissing ass with the bosses simply rubbed Gus the wrong way.
The bosses like Scott simply because he told them what they wanted to hear and kissed ass (the Dikensian aspect). After the last round of buy-outs, the bosses were looking for anything to put the spotlight on the paper so they could move on to bigger and better things. Nothing could be better than one of their own reporters as the centerpiece of the hottest story in the city. Careers are launched on a lot less.
|
|
|
Posts:
204
Registered:
8/16/01
|
|
(30 of 33)
Mar 12, 2008 6:53 PM
|
Jayson Blair was fired from the New York Times in 2003 after he was caught plagiarizing and fabricating elements of his stories. Blair?s quick advancement may have become favored as part of a "star system" that advanced some reporters close to then-executive editor. In his memoir Burning Down My Masters' House: My Life at the New York Times, Blair accused The Times of racism.
Janet Cooke won a Pulitzer Prize for a fabricated story that she wrote for The Washington Post. In an article entitled Jimmy's World, Cooke wrote a gripping profile of the life of an 8-year-old heroin addict. Despite growing signs of problems, the Post defended the veracity of the story and Assistant Managing Editor Bob Woodward nominated the story for the Pulitzer Prize. Cooke resigned and returned the Prize. She claimed that the high-pressure environment of the Post had corrupted her judgment. She also said that her sources had hinted to her about the existence of a boy such as Jimmy, but unable to find him, she eventually created a story about him in order to satisfy her editors.
Stephen Glass a reporter for The New Republic was fired for fabricating articles. There had been warning signs. But The New Republic continued to stand behind their star young writer and editor Michael Kelly fired off an angry letter to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which had complained about Glass, calling them liars and demanding they apologize to Glass.
Patricia Smith gained notoriety when The Boston Globe asked her to resign after editors discovered her metro column contained fictional characters and fabricated events in violation of journalism practice.
The reporters are similar, they were young and they wrote dramatic stories that captured reader interest and increased circulation--and increasingly a healthy bottom line is more important to those who own newspapers (and who place business people instead of journalist in charge of newspapers).
If, as I have maintained, The Wire is really about how we allow institutions to fail us, than the failure of the Baltimore Sun to identify cheaters falls perfectly in line with the failure of schools to teach, law enforcement to protect, and government to lead. The management liked Scott because he wrote stories that sold newspapers--and that is all they were after. News gathering is a labor intensive profession and rarely makes anyone a star. But if you have the willingness and tenacity to follow a story, as Woodward and Berstein did in the 1970s, sometimes the news makes a difference. However, stories such as Watergate are few and far between, meanwhile newspapers compete with TV and the Internet, not in news reporting, but in advertising sales, where the real money is made. Woodward and Berstein didn't have to fabricate their story, but as an assistant managing editor, Woodward failed to recognize a lie when he should have seen it.
Gus was after Scott because Scott was a liar. The Managing Editor and Editor knew a cash cow when they saw one. Therein lies the difference. There is a vast difference between creative writing and news reporting, a good editor knows the difference, a business man is not interested in the difference. So, the newspaper accepts a prize for reporting that did not happen and Gus was lucky they didn't boot him out the door.
--
Ego venit , Ego vidi , Ego trinus super meus own feet:
I came, I saw, I tripped over my own feet.
|
|
|
Posts:
18
Registered:
3/11/08
|
|
(29 of 33)
Mar 12, 2008 5:20 PM
|
|
Yeah. It seems that when someone wants to do something good in The Wire it bites them in the ass. Thanks for agreeing. It seems the case in this show. I know very few people who try to do good that end up ahead in real life. I guess alot of basketball players (Steve Nash,Yao Ming, Shawn Marion and others) do right. But it seems that no one cares about good when they don't play well. Crazy world we live in I guess. Maybe The Wire will open people's eyes, but I'm not counting on it. Everyone is is worried about them and their's when real shit is happening all around us. Hopefully the right person will take action and save us all. At least those in the ghettos. Nothing will change unless we do something ourselves. Start in your hometown and spread outwards from there. If we all take a proactive stance and don't sway maybe things will change (if the powers that be see it that way). If everyone were a Bubbles we can change it all. Help please!
|
|
|
Posts:
9
Registered:
3/14/07
|
|
(28 of 33)
Mar 12, 2008 1:12 PM
|
Gus was the only guy in The Wire that was pure good it seems. Everyone else had something on them. Daniels and Carver ended up good but they started dirty. Scott sucks. Awards for BS. Guess that's the way it goes. It's sad to see a guy trying to do what's right and getting the shaft.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I totally agree w/your statement!!
|
|
|
Posts:
18
Registered:
3/11/08
|
|
(27 of 33)
Mar 12, 2008 12:22 PM
|
|
Gus was the only guy in The Wire that was pure good it seems. Everyone else had something on them. Daniels and Carver ended up good but they started dirty. Scott sucks. Awards for BS. Guess that's the way it goes. It's sad to see a guy trying to do what's right and getting the shaft.
|
|
|
Posts:
11
Registered:
1/24/08
|
|
(26 of 33)
Mar 12, 2008 12:09 PM
|
Gus is the truth. I love his character, hes not afraid to say how he feels. Hes is not out to get that moron Scott. Scott is a shiesty, conniveing liar who cant be trusted and gus saw that early on. Gus would complain about Scott but he really never went into strict detail about what scot did and why, he had enough evidence. I just wish he would have talked to Mcnulty.Scott was an asshole, he got away with what he was doing because he was white, and betta yet a black man was complaining, so naturally it looked like hateration, it was the mockery of the work gus loved
--
nwhitley
|
|
|
Posts:
42
Registered:
1/24/08
|
|
(25 of 33)
Mar 10, 2008 11:43 AM
|
|
how many times have I seen this? just way too many. I do not have a problem with someone who is ambitious and wants to advance themselves, but when the truth is compromised for the sake of gain, it creates problems. Peolple like Scott Templeton are seen thourghout the work force and often always get to the top. The trade off is none of their peers respect them and the people they screw over look upon them with contempt. Things revolve in a full circle; eventually they are exposed for the frauds they are and/or are always the considered the office joke or kissass. The only people who dont seem to see them as frauds are the idiots who advanced them. Probably because they're bosses who got to where they are in the same manner.
|
|
|
Posts:
16
Registered:
7/9/07
|
|
(24 of 33)
Mar 9, 2008 10:16 AM
|
In newspapers it isn't climbing the corporate ladder for reporters-it is the recognition and byline and front page space awarded for good reporting-and ultimately a Pulitzer Prize. The Jason Blair thing-Jason was a black reporter hired by the NYTimes in the push for minority hiring. He wasn't properly monitored and was under pressure to produce, some of it institutional and most of it personal pressure. He just took the easy way-make it up. In the Wire, Simon, (the ex-Baltimore Sun reporter with a huge grudge against the whole-newspaper-as-business industry and a new metro editor and executive editor) reverses the NYT rolls of the editor to a black editor (Gus) and a white reporter (Scott). This is also a composite of the actual editors of the Sun at the time when Simon worked there. There have been lots of interviews and articals from and about Simon discussing the characters and his grudge against the paper and TPTB at the Sun. We were worried that his grudge and opinions about the news industry would overshadow the Wire story, but interestingly I think he has kept his editorializing about the whole industry to a realistic representation of what has happened-is happening now. It does make for interesting reading if you look at some of the stuff Simon has said about newspapers.
In the time of "do more with less" and the newspaper industry still making over 20% profit (at that time) satisfying the shareholders was more important to the business heads of the newpaper chains than the actual integrity of the news. The Philadelphia Inquirer is a prime example of this issue.
Also, the Pulitzer thing makes people do strange things...
--
allgaul
^who doesn't mind getting dusted!
|
|
|
Posts:
859
Registered:
1/17/08
|
|
(23 of 33)
Mar 7, 2008 8:22 PM
|
|
I think you all made some awesome points and I am right with you. I have to say I just don't like Scott or the management at the paper and wish it would just blow up in their faces. I really like Gus. He is a real guy that is out doing honest work. I'd love to see him at the top.
|
|
|
Posts:
15
Registered:
1/30/08
|
|
(22 of 33)
Mar 5, 2008 12:36 PM
|
> The hidden message with the conflict between these
> two also takes on racial overtones as well.
> Eventhough it's clearly Gus job as the editor to
> o stay on Scott to do the right things, you see the
> higher ups in the office (who ironically are always
> white) basically step on Gus' authority at every turn
> which the staff looks at intently. They pat Scott on
> the back eventhough those higher ups already know
> themselves that Scott is cutting corners. It's just
> a microcosm of the way the business world still works
> even today of how folks stick to their own and that
> blacks, no matter how hard they work, or how much
> integrity they possess, still have to work 10 times
> as hard to garner the respect their white
> counterparts in the same field have to. That is the
> telling part to me between their conflict.
I think your analysis is on the money. If you recall, Gus had to get the white metro editor to back him up when he drew the line on Scott's homeless vigil story. You would think that Gus, as a veteran employee and editor, would have more credibility than a young inexperienced reporter.
I also see the same racial elements in the homeless killings. City hall had no problem scaling down the resources to investigate the homicides in the vacants (all black victims), but when white homeless men were thought to be preyed upon, it caused the Carcetti Administration to give the police more resources than it could handle.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,231
Registered:
11/6/06
|
|
(21 of 33)
Mar 5, 2008 12:09 AM
|
I think that it's a combination of both. Gus doesn't like Scott because he's making up shit, just to climb the corporate ladder.
--
"It's not that you do shit, it's how you do it."
"Shit. I'll take any motherfuckin' money if he givin' it away, now."
"That's right. Wee-Bey walked in Jessup a man, and he gon' walk out one. But you out here, wearing his name, acting a bitch."
"You don't what, motherfucker? This how you pay me back for all the love I showed? Shit... I been kept you in Nikes since you were in diapers."
"The bigger the lie, the more they believe."
"Don't sleep on Marlo, he up in some shit here."
|
|
|
Posts:
18
Registered:
2/25/08
|
|
(20 of 33)
Mar 5, 2008 12:07 AM
|
I dont know how I missed this, but I rewatched the first few epi's and Scott has lied from the giddy up, He doesnt try hard at all to get the true story. I know the other wire fans got that but I missed it, somehow, looking back now that whole newspaper story is pretty damn good, Gus's instincts were right from the jump. Gus said that he wanted to be a part of what made his own father so intrested in the paper, so it is fitting that he does the job with integrity and wants to call Scott on his BS game.Scott is just an arrogant asshole who is only concerned with skipping steps to get ahead, not decently working his way up the ladder, like Mike F is. Shiiiiiiit
--
I Luv the wire!!
|
|
|
Posts:
276
Registered:
11/11/07
|
|
(19 of 33)
Mar 4, 2008 8:50 PM
|
> Scott is a composit character-reporter making up the
> news.
> He is like the 27-year-old black staff writer Jayson
> Blair from the NYTimes. He was accused of
> plagiarizing an article about a woman whose son was
> killed fighting in Iraq. The newspaper said at least
> 36 of the 73 articles written by Blair and examined
> by the internal investigation had problems with
> accuracy, or were outright falsifications, calling
> the deception a "low point" in the paper's history.
>
> Among the falsified stories were several about the
> Washington-area sniper case and several interviews
> with family members of those fighting in Iraq. Many
> times, the investigation found, Blair faked datelines
> on stories, after combing photographs for details
> that would give the impression that he had been at
> the scene.
>
> --
> allgaul
> ^who doesn't mind getting dusted!
>
> --
> Edited by allgaul at 03/04/2008 3:24 PM
I vagely remember that! It makes you wonder if anybody got a feeling there was something up with this guy.
|
|
|
|
|
