I read an interview with Clint Eastwood the other day in The New York Times. A great interview with a great man, and a great paper, but all three were tarnished by one line.
The interviewer, presumably, asks Clint to confirm that he’s a vegan. Turns out he’s not. Apparently the writer did his research on Wikipedia because that’s what he cites as a source:
“Despite what you might have read on Wikipedia,” he writes, “Eastwood is not a vegan, and he looked slightly aghast when told exactly what a vegan is”.
“I never look at the Internet for just that reason,” he said.
Ouch. The New York Times takes a swipe at Wikipedia and Clint comes across as stuck in the era of spaghetti westerns. And the journalist? Well, I'm not one to diss a colleague, but the point he scores is a cheap one, and I'd counsel anyone against relying...