---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Caltrider, Jen " To: "'jericho@attrition.org'" Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 12:43:38 -0400 Subject: cnn story on errata I understand the ann kellan/cnn story you have up on your errata page isn't perfect (it was actually the first hacker story i worked on, i was sort of a co-producer on it). However, there is some info i would like to qualify about that story and, more importantly, Ann Kellan. First off, Ann Kellan wrote that story for broadcast tv (it was called "hacker subculture" by us although what we call stories doesn't matter cause that doesn't make air). And the story you have up off of CNN interactive is only a small part of the whole story written by Ann Kellan. They way it works at CNN is people like me (producer) and Ann (correspondent) will work on a story, talk to people, do interviews on camera, shoot video, etc. Then we'll come back, look at everything we have on tape and write out story based on that and the other factual info we gather. We write a story based on the facts AND the video and interview sound that we have. That boils down to a package (which is a script, generally written by the correspondent that is tracked and then edited together with our interview sound and our video). Hope this is all making sense. Anyway..back to the point of all this. Ann's story was written for broadcast and was actually a 6 minute piece. The story you have up on your errata page is from CNN Interactive. What CNN interactive will do is take a script (just the written portion of the story and remember we are writing to video and interview sound) and edit it to work in print on their website. Those edits are often done without any input or editorial control from the correspondent. So, in the case of the story you have up on your errata page, they took Ann's script, cut into down by about 2/3 and edited it for print. If you had seen the TV version of this story you would know that Ann Kellan does a stand-up (that's were she is actually on camera, full faced, talking, not just covered track. stand-ups make the correspondent's point even clearer) saying that hacking doesn't boil down to just black and white, "there is a lot of gray." Of course, CNN interactive edited that part out of the script they posted on the website. So, the main fault you found with that piece was actually something created by CNN interactive's editing of a script they had nothing to do with, not Ann Kellan's misunderstanding human nature and the hacker subculture. While both Ann and I will admit there is a whole lot about both human nature AND the hacker subculture we don't understand, the fact that there are many gray areas is something we do get. Unfortunately, whoever edited this at CNN intereactive didn't bother to do a good job and make the same points Ann made clear in her script, clear in the online, printed version of the same script. So, as a result, Ann looks bad for something she didn't even do wrong. Another thing about Ann that i just wanted to throw in here...she is one of only a very few correspondents at CNN that i know of who is really working to understand the hacker underground and who cares to try to get the information correct when she has to cover this beat. While she and I both may not be getting everything right all the time in covering the hacker world, we are trying to learn and do better so we don't make the same mistakes that have been made in the past. So, having her name up on your errata page for a mistake she didn't make seems like it could only do harm rather than good. Sorry i was so wordy in getting all of that out. I hope it made some sense. I guess the gist of it is that the piece you got off of CNN interactive isn't really an Ann Kellan piece, it's just part of an Ann Kellan piece that someone with no information took and edited. If you had seen the entire Kellan piece there still might have been things you didn't like, but the one you pointed out in your errata wouldn't have been one of those mistakes. She better than anyone understands that nothing in life is really black and white. And also, she is one of the good people i work with here at CNN that does care to get the facts straight and the information presented correctly. For her to have a knock her name when she is one that cares seems more harmful that good. Ahh well.... When i showed this to her she was upset, not a you for printing what you did--to her you were just working to right a wrong--but with CNN Interactive for taking some of her work, editing it without her editorial control, and then posting it with her byline. She also says that this isn't the first time something like that has happened to her with CNN Interactive and she is going to talk to the powers that be about getting that process changed.