So, in a sense, the verification piece is irrelevant to the format issue.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I think it's one of the Times' problems that they haven't made it clear to readers what various formats mean.
Formats are going to change because this is what the people want. It's not what the labels want.
I think when you're doing good work, you don't necessarily need to be validated.
I think anytime you start relying on a format to get you by you've got weak material to begin with.
Readers often bring a different set of criteria to the work based on the format.
Anyone nit-picking enough to write a letter of correction to an editor doubtless deserves the error that provoked it.
The authenticity thing has never been an issue for me.
Many a good newspaper story has been ruined by over verification.
It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry.
I'm convinced you can combine this with reporting integrity and accuracy.