More and more frequently the New York Times shows complete douchebaggery in the news stories it publishes (just take a look at this gem, “How to Speak Nanny“). In today’s science section though, they really fucked the goat-ass.
Until last week, paleontologists could offer no clear-cut evidence for the color of dinosaurs. Then researchers provided evidence that a dinosaur called Sinosauropteryx had a white-and-ginger striped tail. And now a team of paleontologists has published a full-body portrait of another dinosaur, in striking plumage that would have delighted that great painter of birds John James Audubon.
“This is actual science, not ‘Avatar,’ ” said Richard O. Prum, an evolutionary biologist at Yale and co-author of the new study, published in Science.
Thanks, Dr. Prum, for that really insightful comment. Not only have you probably correctly judged that most Americans are dumb enough to associate science with Avaghey, but you’ve also proved you’re just cynical enough to add a buzzword into your quote so that maybe Google will point a few more readers to you.
And you, New York Times, are guilty of the same thing, and also of shitty news writing. Using a quote that has no place in the context of the rest of the story? And no explanation as to what the good doctor means? That maybe his stupid quote is a reference to the magical colorful fairyland of Pandora? Bleh.
Weak. Just plain weak. How about instead of cutting staff as necessary you cut everyone and start over? You’re really getting into LA Times territory here.
