In "Blaming the Times..." Jack Shafer writes that:

"If Google users conclude that an individual is guilty of fondling a child just because a Times story reported his arrest, that says more about their gullibility than it does about the inadequacies of the Web or the Times."

1. That could well be true, but who exactly does Shafer think is using Google? Strictly Ivy League PhDs with years of research experience? Rocket scientists? No, Google is used by people of all IQs and as such, yes, many will believe what they read. So does Shafer think that because some folks are gullible, always will be, the Times is off the hook? The problem here is that, knowing that so many people are gullible, and that many more poeple have access to their stories in the Internet age, the Times should make doubly sure they're right; and when they aren't, they should most certainly correct themselves.

2. Is it so ridiculous that some poeple may go to the newspaper of record to get information? By Shafer's logic, anyone who believs something they read in the newspaper is simply gullible. So what's the point of newspapers? Not everyone has the time/inclination/know-how to track down the real story. Some people have "jobs" and rely on newspapers to learn what's going on in the world.