Talk:David Corn

message: the following comments by "Andres Kargar" were on Talk:Gary_Webb but removed by someone (but still in the history). I thought this would be a better place for this, so that we may pull out the facts that can be added to the article, so I have copied them here. Jan 4 2005
:Comments removed. Please review Wikipedia:Talk page.  If you feel this information is important to the article, than post just that information.  If you feel you need to post the whole article, then provide a link to a web page with a comment describing how the material will improve the article.  --Viriditas  | Talk 00:51, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've taken a stab at it now. It might or might not warrant more detail, depending on what can be independently confirmed in reputable sources. Whatever one's views of Novak, his implicit observation is dead-on that "bloating" is a problem for accounts of this episode, including as it applies to this article. --Michael Snow 06:47, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Problem:
Half of the introduction (8 of 16 lines) is dedicated to what seems to be a within-office dispute about a French book, not about his own writing or career accomplishments.
Explanation:
There is a tension in the article between (a) the broad range of Corn's writing accomplishments, and (b) the emphasis given in the first 16 lines linking Corn to a small  controversy.   
The article seems to (rightly) list some of Corn's author accomplishments: 
    * Blond Ghost 
    * Deep Background. 
    * The Lies of George W. Bush 
    * Hubris: 
However, despite this, about 8 of the 16 lines of the introduction to his career are fully dedicated to what seems to be a relatively small within-office dispute over a specific decision about a French book.  
On one occasion, he criticized his own organization when Nation Books (a sibling to The Nation) chose to publish the translation of a controversial French book on Osama bin Laden and the September 11 attacks. The book, Forbidden Truth by Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquié (former editor-in-chief of Intelligence Online), suggested that the attacks resulted after a breakdown in talks between the Taliban and the United States to run an oil pipeline through Afghanistan. Corn argued that publishing "contrived conspiracy theories" undermined the ability to expose actual governmental misbehavior.
The amount of space given to a within-office dispute is out of balance and strange. 
Was that one of his career accomplishments?   
Ihaveabutt (talk) 04:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, it's undue detail for the lead. I thought about shortening the 2nd paragraph but the incident isn't mentioned  in the body text -- though notable enough -- probably because it can't be easily squeezed into an existing section. Someone would have to make a section on his non-book writings. El duderino (talk) 06:48, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strange Eight Lines (about a French book)  

message: The words typical and normal are not neutral: 
and broke from typical journalistic practice with its explicit charge of lying, a term normally avoided as editorializing
They create a clearly negative tone, they imply a moral judgment on Corn, and they inject a judgmental standard that is arbitrary and not supported. 
Corn and many authors have supported their statements. 
The terms typical, normally avoided are not a neutral point of view.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ihaveabutt (talk • contribs) 05:19, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Words not neutral 

message: He was involved in getting the Romney $50K party tape published.  Might this be important?  76.21.107.221 (talk) 00:16, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romney tape publication 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on David Corn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081006185727/http://www.observer.com/2007/mother-jones-lures-david-corn-nation to http://www.observer.com/2007/mother-jones-lures-david-corn-nation
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060228213117/http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/episodes/02152006 to http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/episodes/02152006
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:53, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Someone apparently associated with Corn or Corn himself has apparently scrubbed any mention that he was under investigation for sexual harassment.  This was not a small matter.  There were two lengthy articles about alleged conduct in Politico.  Mother Jones officially said that Corn was under investigation, and then came under investigation a second time.  Corn himself admitted that some of his misconduct was inappropriate. This information had been contained in part in this biographcial article for months. It was deleted apparently by Corn or someone associated with Corn because it was deleted with all other negative information contained in his article at the same time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cathradgenations (talk • contribs) 
:Criticisms need very strong sourcing.  I've removed these charges of misconduct.  Gandydancer (talk) 18:21, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Per  NPOV requires us to include this information. Mr Ernie (talk) 21:35, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite the opposite, Ernie. SPECIFICO talk 21:56, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly, right? Mr Ernie (talk) 23:43, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

text: I agree with SPECIFICO that this is definitely undue.  Gandydancer (talk) 02:06, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

text: , I just read the content that you've added. If included (looks like inclusion was opposed above), it should be a section in the body with all of those details, not in the lead. Schazjmd (talk) 00:29, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Sexual Harassment Allegations