8 Comments

  1. You're hired! says:

    May 28, 2012 at 9:04 pm

    Nice work internet detective. Did you consider the possibility that the grandma misremembered the date, the reporter mistranscribed the date, or that the dead uncle had a photo taken of him with a girl he once dated after they stopped dating that his mom didn’t know about?

    Fashions don’t look ’88, but they don’t look quite like late 70′s either. Given it’s Kansas, mid-80′s fashion is a distinct possibility.

  2. FreeVerse Photography says:

    May 28, 2012 at 10:37 pm

    It’s entirely possible the dates are wrong but in the end, it isn’t the family’s story I had a problem with. The reporters made this out as some sort of miracle when it is quite mundane. Whether or not the photo was in the camera as claimed, or the entire story is utterly fabricated, the reporter should have done the work so we wouldn’t need to.

  3. You're hired! says:

    May 29, 2012 at 10:13 pm

    Finding a camera at a random garage sale with a picture of your long dead relative is “mundane?” I want to live in your world.

  4. Pesla says:

    May 30, 2012 at 10:48 am

    This was printed in a newspaper…where the news is. The real news, and I agree the reporter should have done some kind of research, I mean, make a phone call. You aren’t picking on the family, you are picking on the inability of local newspaper reporters to get any facts at all. Most people gulp this stuff up without questioning it, weather it is some heartfelt story or a hard hitting article.

    The inquisitive shall conquer the world :o)

  5. FreeVerse Photography says:

    May 30, 2012 at 12:10 pm

    I tried very hard not criticize the family, it’s there story and they can tell it however they wish. Indeed, I was an inventive youngster myself. The paper should be ashamed to run this kind of stuff.

  6. You're hired! says:

    May 31, 2012 at 12:55 am

    “The lad allegedly discovered…”

    “…it’s a cute little story the kid told his grandmother.”

    “Indeed, I was an inventive youngster myself.”

    …sure make it sound like you’re criticizing the boy.

    Could the kid be lying? Of course.
    Could the 60+ year old grandma be off on her dates? Possible.
    Could the reporter have mis-transcribed the dates grandma said? Read any news story about a topic you’re familiar with and you’ll know how very possible that is.
    Could someone have stuck an incompatible photo in the cartridge? As you admit and a commenter on the Eagle story confesses, it’s not out of the question.

    My point, and this goes for internet detectives in every field, is that you can’t take a few facts you can deduce (the date of introduction of the camera or that the camera couldn’t have taken that photo) and immediately judge the veracity of the whole story. The “accumulated intellectual minutia” of the “pedantic ass[es]” on the internet can still jump to incorrect conclusions.

    And even though you also don’t have any evidence that they didn’t fact check the story (they could’ve found the very same information you did, but when everything else checked out, decided such technical nitpicking didn’t merit mention,) I’m with you, I’d also rather the newspaper fact check a little more. But given limited news gathering resources, I’d rather even more that they spend their fact checking time on real news stories.

  7. JennaDee says:

    June 23, 2012 at 2:33 pm

    ok – maybe you’re right. But if he is fibbing, let the kid and his family have their damn miracle. It isn’t like the other mainstream news sources we’ve been subject to for the past century has been any more trustworthy.

Leave a Reply