There have been many times when we have not run stories because we cannot get it verified.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Rather than doing the kind of fact-checking that normally goes with a story, you ran with certain stories for not wanting to get beat. There's a pressure that exists in your profession. I would be surprised in any honest exchange that you say that doesn't exist.
Many have been with the show for years, and they have sources in the business, so we do know things, but until it is verified, we don't run with the story.
I know that from the days of Watergate... the notion of two sources on a story has become the popular dogma about how you confirm something. And there is a lot of truth to that, but there are all kinds of ways to check to the extent that you can, a story that you get.
Stories are different every time you tell them - they allow so many possible narratives.
You have to go where the story is to report on it. As a journalist, you're essentially running to things that other people are running away from.
If a story isn't working, I'm simply unable to finish it. That's what usually tells me something is wrong.
We have to be really sensitive to making sure were not creating any stories that don't feel like they're ready to be told... We have to make sure we're getting the right story and the right content from the talent we work with.
Many a good newspaper story has been ruined by over verification.
I do live with the very real possibility that we don't have endless stories to tell.
I have never made a game that wasn't explicitly about empowering players to tell their own story.
No opposing quotes found.