in brad's case, he had already done the footwork, though.
>The slogan in journalism
>being "Go with what you got." But I agree with Brad that it is
>better, then, to say "X,quoted by Y in." But editors often hate any
>inline citation in articles.
did you notice that cockburn had already cited WSWS's David North, to wit:
David North, of the Trotskyist Fourth International wrote on the World Socialist (http://www.wsws.org) website on February 23: "On the very day that Pearl's murder was confirmed, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld admitted that US troops had mistakenly killed 16 anti-Taliban Afghan fighters, but refused to apologize. It does not require exceptional political insight to realize that in the decision to murder Pearl, the desire for revenge was a major subjective factor."
takes a lot of balls to not go on to do the same.
plus he's writing for counterpunch, ne? i'm sure he can manage to consistently break with the mainstream editorial "rules" on his own friggin' publication!
>In our Z Magazine workshops for lefty journalists, Holly Sklar and I
>argue that fighting for inline citation in articles is important for
>3 reasons:
>
>1) It's the ethical thing to do.
>2) It rebuts the guru syndrome whereby famous writers imply they are
>omniscient.
>3) It increases the diversity of voices in public discourse.
exactly so. not to mention, it appears that it leads to the wonderous, stupendous habit we have seen exhibited on this list where people read _about_ what feminists supposedly said and then think they know what those feminists actually said.
kelley