[Esip-preserve] potential NYT editorial on data

[Hampapuram Ramapriyan]

Matt,

An opinion article in Eos sounds good to me. But since the reason for submitting it to NYT was so that a broader audience would read it, I also wonder if we should try the Washington Post. Also, sending to both a liberal and a conservative paper (may be slightly different versions) might be usefful.

Rama.

 

From: Esip-preserve [mailto:esip-preserve-bounces at lists.esipfed.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Mayernik via Esip-preserve
Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2017 10:38 AM
To: esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org
Subject: Re: [Esip-preserve] potential NYT editorial on data

 

Hi all,

I have not heard from the NYT, so according to their auto-response we can assume they do not want it. Any suggestions for next steps? EOS is an obvious possibility, but anybody want to argue for something else?

Matt

 

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Matthew Mayernik <mayernik at ucar.edu> wrote:

Thanks all. I did submit the article this afternoon. The submitted doc is attached for your reference. I added a basic preliminary title, but the NYT op-ed guidance says that NYT will choose the title, so that's not important. They sent me an auto-response that said that we should know within 3 business days, and that if we don't hear by then, we can assume they don't want it and submit elsewhere.

Thanks again for all of your input,

Best,

Matt

 

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Parsons, Mark <parsom3 at rpi.edu> wrote:

Well done, sir. You demonstrated exemplary inclusivity, leadership, and compelling writing. 

 

fingers crossed.

 

-m. 

On Apr 28, 2017, at 19:34, Matthew Mayernik via Esip-preserve <esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org> wrote:

 

Hi all,

Thanks for all of your input. I've gone through your comments and edits and have a much improved draft. As I mentioned, I think timeliness is more important than the exact wording at this point, so I'd like to call it good enough, and ready to submit. I'll try to get it in today, not soon enough for this weekend, but potentially for next week if they like it.

Also, I've had a few side conversations about authorship. I don't know NYT policies on authorship, but if they accept, I will work with them to find some way to indicate the group authorship, either in the by-line or as an added sentence somewhere. 

Matt

 

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Matthew Mayernik <mayernik at ucar.edu> wrote:

Hi all,

I've put together a potential submission to the New York Times as a follow-on to our data rescue document. Mark Parsons and Ruth Duerr provided a very helpful first edit.

Given that the chances of being accepted are very slim, and largely hinge on the timeliness of the topic, at this point I'd ask that you focus any feedback on 1) factual corrections, and/or 2) key calls to action, e.g. what would we hopefully want people to do as a result of reading the article. If it is accepted, the NYT would have major input in the final column, so wordsmithing at this stage isn't necessary. For these reasons, I made the doc comment-only. 

Please do send any objections, however, to the idea of doing a NYT editorial in the first place. 


https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SGJnqaSqOK8UGsTATAicyTH_W5rmBW6lSSZ8vLvN4iA/edit?usp=sharing

Best,

Matt

 

_______________________________________________
Esip-preserve mailing list
Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org
http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve

 

 

 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.deltaforce.net/pipermail/esip-preserve/attachments/20170504/9c101cc3/attachment.html>