Washington Post Article Mentions Pricescope's LIW

[lktx]

The article quotes kribbie and sweetpepsigirl.

Here's the link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/weddings/like-clockwork-jewelers-and-wedding-industry-gear-up-for-jingle-bell-rock/2011/12/16/gIQAIGbxCP_story.html

 

[RebeccaMUA]

Wow....did they ask permission to use those quotes?? Those are pretty personal...

 

[monarch64]

Rebecca, it's a public forum with anonymous user names, so I doubt that permission has to be granted.

Seems we have a journalist in our midst...wonder if they're a regular poster or just a lurker?

 

[ame]

I REALLY dislike that. And I really disliked the snide remark afterwards about the longevity of her relationship.

 

[AprilBaby]

I'm guessing it's a regular poster, and I thought I was kind of mean.

 

[MissStepcut]

I mean... not, it's not particularly nice, but I'm not surprised by it. The framing of the quote reflects how the whole LIW thing looks outside the PS bubble.

Like Monarch said, it's a public forum. If you think there aren't people who read LIW for a good laugh, you're being naïve.

 

[decodelighted]

So, fear not, sweetpepsigirl. Your day will come. Maybe next year Santa will turn that lump of coal into a diamond. And you’ll be surfing over to The Knot in no time. ********dust*******.


Ha. That *is* pretty snarky.

 

[madelise]

That's.. Not the nicest thing. But it's not the meanest, either. If someone wanted to mean, they could have picked this forum apart with all those random girls that join, post twice about their 3 month relationships and baby daddies, and how they want a 3 carat ring already bc waiting 3 months is just WAY too long.. Then disappear and never post again. I don't think the writer meant harm. She probably quoted Pepsi to show how effective those scumbag marketers are! Cus it's true!! I hope Pepsi isn't hurt by this, though. Pepsi, you out there?

 

[MissStepcut]

Is that even true though? I think our snarky spy might have gotten her LIWs confused; hasn't SPG been in a relationship well over a year?

That quote should have been contributed to WishfulDreamer.

 

[HollyS]

Well, this may be a public forum, but that was in particularly bad taste. And to snark right back at WP, "You call that journalism?" As if no one had a clue about the 'wedding industry'. What a breaking story that was.

Posters, you want to remember just how public internet social media sites really are, regardless of 'screen names'. If you wouldn't want it talked/written about outside of PS, perhaps it shouldn't be posted about on PS.

 

[MBKRH]

Is that even true though? I think our snarky spy might have gotten her LIWs confused; hasn't SPG been in a relationship well over a year?

That quote should have been contributed to WishfulDreamer.

You're right, MissStepcut.That WAS my quote. Sorry that they quoted SPG.


That's just awesome, I've had a shitty a** day and now I come home to see that. Now I really feel like an a**hole.
Maybe I should back away from PS for a while. I'll come back when it's acceptable to moan about being a LIW of just over a year.

Good luck to you all.

 

[tammy77]

WD, no need to get upset with the whole LIW/PS community. I'm sure you're welcome here regardless of the length of your relationship. Sorry to hear you had a rough day and FWIW, I'm also sorry about the article. It's pretty awful and I'm sure that whoever wrote it wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of that situation, just wrong.

 

[MBKRH]

Tammy, I'm not upset at the LIW/PS community. I've found some nice people here, gotten good advice, read wonderful stories, and gawked at beautiful rings.

That story hurt a lot, I'm not going to lie. I also know that yes, it's the internet, and once you put something out there, you can expect all sorts of feedback, good or bad. But, I didn't need this today.

Just because I've only been with the bf roughly 7 months, that somehow portrays me negatively. As I've said, I've known him for over a year. But that doesn't matter, I suppose. All my other relationships have been 18 months, 5 years, and 6.5 years. I'm 29, not 18. I'm looking for commitment, not gold.

 

[inflorescence]

oh great, that's exactly what i need, interesting you post this.... because I had a nightmare last night that my boyfriend found out about this site, read all my posts.. and I was VERY embarrassed... he knows I sometimes use this as a screen name, and the entire dream I was trying to change my screen name so I couldnt be identified, which I couldnt do.... lets hope he never finds this, sigh,.... and no, they didnt ask my permission to use what I was saying in a paper... so angry that what they used isn't even accurate... one sentence out of 4! I want to write the person who wrote the article but Im not from the USA.

 

[inflorescence]

For the record I have been in a relationship for 2.5 years... and we're closer to 30 then 25...

 

[inflorescence]

ALOT of that I didnt even say, interesting how the change your words for what THEY want in their article.

 

[madelise]

Goosfraabaa, girls! It's ok, there's a million bajillion articles out there, you'll be fine. I'm sorry you're having a shitastic day, WD. Tomorrow's a new one, don't follow that snark-asm shit, and for what it's worth, I think you being with your SO 7 months, a friend for a year earlier + your ages factor alot more than just some dumb assumption written by a journalist, let alone a SHITTY journalist that can't even source her quotes correctly! Just by that alone, her article deserves NO merit whatsoever. I really hope you don't dismiss this community just due to that..


SPG, I think you can contact admin to change your screen name? I purposely chose mine for confidentiality from my public/circle's eye or "search-ability". You never know who is googling your name or screennames anymore.. The internet's way too easy to stalk with. Creepy how your nightmare pretty much foreshadowed today's mention of your SN!!

 

[inflorescence]

Goosfraabaa, girls! It's ok, there's a million bajillion articles out there, you'll be fine. I'm sorry you're having a shitastic day, WD. Tomorrow's a new one, don't follow that snark-asm shit, and for what it's worth, I think you being with your SO 7 months, a friend for a year earlier + your ages factor alot more than just some dumb assumption written by a journalist, let alone a SHITTY journalist that can't even source her quotes correctly! Just by that alone, her article deserves NO merit whatsoever. I really hope you don't dismiss this community just due to that..


SPG, I think you can contact admin to change your screen name? I purposely chose mine for confidentiality from my public/circle's eye or "search-ability". You never know who is googling your name or screennames anymore.. The internet's way too easy to stalk with. Creepy how your nightmare pretty much foreshadowed today's mention of your SN!!

Thank you. Does anyone know who or how I can change me screen name?

 

[wakingdreams53]

SPG, contact the mods: https://www.pricescope.com/contact
people change their sn's all the time... and I ought to change mine too lol

 

[Nomsdeplume]

Wtf. I'm changing my username. Is this really even worthy to publish? Bit of a useless "journalist".

 

[Rhea]

That was an entirely pointless article. I'm sorry some of you were quoted in it. That can't feel good. The tone of the article are rather mean in some places.

 

[PA-C]

Yikes. Sorry to the ladies who got quoted. Honestly, the tone of the article makes it sound like she's bitter about something personal.

 

[MissStepcut]

You know, the more I think about it, the more misogynistic this article seems to me. The fact that a woman wrote it doesn't really mitigate that either.

 

[LJL]

I was pretty disgusted when I read the article.... and if I had been quoted - or rather MISQUOTED - I would have contacted them and said something nasty. It really was written with a belittling tone and it was ultimately a useless piece of journalism. My SO knows that I post on this site and knows my username and I would have been horrified if it had been me (and he had read the article which he wouldn't have since he finds online articles pretty superfluous). However, it's making me consider changing my avatar pic since that would be hugely identifying (hi to any people on this site if you know me from my pup!) to anyone who comes to this site trying to look at what they believe to be pathetic LIW's.... but I guess I'm just as pathetic IRL? Hard to believe anybody read that article and learned anything or found anything worthwhile in any way.

Shrug. But the article put me in a bad mood.

 

[inflorescence]

Wtf. I'm changing my username. Is this really even worthy to publish? Bit of a useless "journalist".

sweetpepsigirl wrote the journalist(Ellen) an email and the reply by the journalist was terrible. She claimed she didn't miss quote at all and she ended the email with "I hope you get your ring"
If she ACTUALLY read the forum she would have realized that sweetpepsigirl wants to get engaged to spend the rest of her life with the man... and DOES NOT even want/need a ring at all...

 

[inflorescence]

You know, the more I think about it, the more misogynistic this article seems to me. The fact that a woman wrote it doesn't really mitigate that either.

Could not have called it better than that. It is very misogynistic.... I don't know about you ladies, but the reason I originally came on here was to vent about something in real life I would NEVER talk about to anyone. You are like a sounding board of my mind and the fact some hater is mocking us does not do well for my inner monologue. I never thought I would EVER want to get married, so this is a guilty pleasure to confide in people who feel the same. Unfortunately my comfort bubble was popped by a ejournalist... I honestly wouldnt even call her that, journalists do research into what they write about.

 

[wwmd8118]

Wtf. I'm changing my username. Is this really even worthy to publish? Bit of a useless "journalist".

sweetpepsigirl wrote the journalist(Ellen) an email and the reply by the journalist was terrible. She claimed she didn't miss quote at all and she ended the email with "I hope you get your ring"

Wow, that is just pure snark. I'm sorry to you ladies that got quoted/misquoted. That article was mean-spirited and clearly written by someone wallowing in bitterness for whatever reason. She completely misconstrued the point of LIW, which is women dreaming about their future with the person they love, and this future is represented by a ring at this point in time. Way to cheapen the LIW experience. Yuck.

 

[karpouzi]

Wtf. I'm changing my username. Is this really even worthy to publish? Bit of a useless "journalist".

It's really sad because WaPo used to be a respectable paper. But yeah, I guess going out and finding a few posts on wedding forums and hastily slapping them together without even bothering to make sure you attribute quotes to the proper person is what passes for journalism these days.

@inflorescence: I hope sweetpepsigirl wrote back and said "I hope you get your Pulitzer! lolz!"

 

[MissStepcut]

Wtf. I'm changing my username. Is this really even worthy to publish? Bit of a useless "journalist".

sweetpepsigirl wrote the journalist(Ellen) an email and the reply by the journalist was terrible. She claimed she didn't miss quote at all and she ended the email with "I hope you get your ring"
If she ACTUALLY read the forum she would have realized that sweetpepsigirl wants to get engaged to spend the rest of her life with the man... and DOES NOT even want/need a ring at all...

Well I was pretty upset to hear this, so I emailed her and additionally went over her head and contacted Washington Post about their factual error through their form (available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/interactivity/corrections/ ). What I wrote:

What is the specific error and how can we fix it?
Ellen McCarthy mistakenly attributed two posts on an online message board to the same poster, when in reality, the two quotes were from two different posters.

PriceScope's board administrator can be reached at [email redacted], to verify what the posts originally said.

The error was readily apparent to anyone who had re-read the thread. Unfortunately, both posters have had their screen names changed by the board's administration due to their embarrassment at being mischaracterized and misquoted in McCarthy's snarky and misogynistic article, so you will need to contact the administrator to know which posts were originally quoted and who posted them.

What do we need to know to improve future stories on this topic?
Ideally, Washington Post would employ a fact-checker.

Additionally, Washington Post would do well to avoid snarky and misogynistic topics, particularly when women must be mis-quoted to successfully construe those women as being marriage-hungry or desperate.

 

[RebeccaMUA]

MissStepCut I am soooooo glad you wrote that!!!!