Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> It's not. It's "bouloche" -- https://fr.wiktionary.org/wiki/bouloche

That says a lot about the quality of peer review at the NYT.



That someone missed potentially a typo in a foreign language?


Well, if the objective of the sentence is to teach the reader a word, it's more significant than missing any arbitrary typo in a foreign language.


That could have been checked easily in like 5 seconds of review? Yes.


God forbid you ever make a mistake. Editing standards at NYT are MUCH better than virtually any newspaper that you would care to point to.


I disagree. I find most of what the NYT publishes nowadays of a very low level, biased along with a lack of research. I think it used to be a much better newspaper, but that was a long, long time ago now.

Note that this is not unique to the NYT, the (former) printed press has fallen enormously since the advent of online news (once you can measure what attracts viewers, your articles will tend to be more and more clickbaity and sensationalist by nature).


Peer review? I'd think the NYT has professional copy editors.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: