I Think I'm Finally Over Chlois...

[Aries83]

Because of this episode...I was a little upset she handed over that research to Lois, but this episode was almost flawlessly written, aside from Lana's scene with Clark at the Isis foundation, but I didn't mind Lois being up front. It also allowed Chloe to reveal her secret to Jimmy and in the process of displaying her power, she just became that much stronger to me and I feel ok that she isn't Lois. I also came out of it liking Jimmy a lot more, or should I say for the first time ever since he was introduced into the show. At this point, I don't think I would mind Clois; I know it's coming, but I have seen that Chloe can stand on her own. I guess I'll have to see, but for the moment, I'm content with it.

[ChlarkMe]

Interesting, I thought the opposite in this episode. Lois didn't accomplish anyhing. Once again Lois goes off to get an article published without proof and Lex of all people pointed it out to her.

Well, I do concede her typing seems much improved from the last episode so she scores points there.

[aqgalaxy]

Funny this was the largest proof of Chlois

[Aries83]

Ok...Not that I'm completely convinced, but I thought this was a very well-rounded episode....So, what's the proof you've got, agg?

[aqgalaxy]

Originally posted by Aries83
Ok...Not that I'm completely convinced, but I thought this was a very well-rounded episode....So, what's the proof you've got, agg?

Proof lies with the dialog.

Considering Chloe knows about Lois being assigned the Expose, suggests that it was a few days ago that happened, and Grant was announcing it so..

Since then Lois didn't do any research, (Telling Chloe the information she handed her was her first real source) and only been making out with Grant in the closets of the Daily Planet.

Lex personally requests for Lois Lane to write the story knowing her incompetents. This is a recon to the Blue comment. If Lex was really worried about Lois as he described her in Blue, why would he request her to do the interview? Obviously he doesn't think of her as a threat.

Also the foreshadowing of Noir payed off. It foreshadowed Lex owning practically everything, he owns the DP now.

In Noir Chloe worked at the DP while Lois was some eyecandy for Lex (funny she was dating Lex's brother now...)

Then we have the Meta Episode Action. It foreshadows a reporter's death (Lois/Chloe's) and the other finishing their work. However a strike that it's Lois is the girl dies in the comics but lives in the movie. Reverse it, the girl lives in the comics but dies in Smallville.

Lois Lane was the one, despite warning from Grant and Chloe goes after Lex. She's over her head, especially now that he's her boss and she didn't see that coming.

Chloe gave Lois her research making anything written by Lois Lane Chloe's research, Chloe backs it up, meaning the article goes to Chloe should Lois Lane dies...

Also funny thing, Lois was forced to expose Lex by Adrian, she failed to do that. Despite her Military training and background, Lex knocked her out easily, so she failed.

Also Progeny, Chloe says "The story or me." well seems Like Lois is after the story so it'll be her who gets caught in Lex's crossairs. and Like Action "Someone else will expose him." and that someone is who was in the background, who was the main source of the article, the one who will ultimately take him down and that's Chloe Sullivan, and should Lois Lane die, Chloe will print the article still in lois Lane and take the pseudonym. Thus Chlois.

If they wanted it to be an Anti-Clois episode, they would have set it up where Chloe would die however that's not what is being hinted.

[Khyla]

Originally posted by Aries83
Because of this episode...I was a little upset she handed over that research to Lois, but this episode was almost flawlessly written, aside from Lana's scene with Clark at the Isis foundation, but I didn't mind Lois being up front. It also allowed Chloe to reveal her secret to Jimmy and in the process of displaying her power, she just became that much stronger to me and I feel ok that she isn't Lois. I also came out of it liking Jimmy a lot more, or should I say for the first time ever since he was introduced into the show. At this point, I don't think I would mind Clois; I know it's coming, but I have seen that Chloe can stand on her own. I guess I'll have to see, but for the moment, I'm content with it.

First let me say i almost felt like you, and actually was pretty sure I was going to quit my interest in SV altogether .... UNTIL ... the Bizarro Reveal! Holy Christmas! :eek: They knew how to suck me right back and they did it in a few seconds at the end of the episode!

If they can pull a twist like that out of their @ss at the last second, why should I doubt they could pull off something they've been nurturing since the series inception? (like Chlois, maybe?)

And as far as you saying you can see that Chloe can stand on her own... When were you ever NOT ABLE to see her stand on her own ?? :confused: Clark's the one who seems to be the one who has had trouble standing on his own! Chloe has always been a strong self-sufficient girl, who is able to stand on her own, who doesn't need a man to define herself, as Lois should be also.

[Lostfan588]

Really. I thought this episode was yet again more proof of Chlois. Especially Chloe's ironic line to Lois following the makeout scene with the boss....:lol:

[Mello Penelo]

Originally posted by ChlarkMe
Interesting, I thought the opposite in this episode. Lois didn't accomplish anyhing. Once again Lois goes off to get an article published without proof and Lex of all people pointed it out to her.

Well, I do concede her typing seems much improved from the last episode so she scores points there.

And Chloe writing her meteor freak tabloid in high school makes her so high and mighty over Lois? Chloe couldn't prove anything she wrote. Regardless of it being true, she couldn't prove it.

And Lois didn't get this article printed. Besides, she even called out the clone guy for proof and he couldn't offer it.

I am so sick of Chloe fanatics and their high horse of how she's better than Lois when she's really no better.

[Lostfan588]

Originally posted by Mello Penelo
And Chloe writing her meteor freak tabloid in high school makes her so high and mighty over Lois?

Wrong. Its not a "tabloid" if its fact.

Yeah, considering Lex personally requested Lois for this "expose" and Lois is screaming from the rooftops "Im going to be the one to expose you!" Uhhhh, doesn't this make Lois look totally like the pawn in the Luthor game? Considering EDLois is the one out in the open proclaiming Im gonna getcha!

That Action episode "If I don't expose you then someone else will" is just making more and more sense....not to mention the Noir foreshadowing is coming true as well.

[Mello Penelo]

Originally posted by Lostfan588
Wrong. Its not a "tabloid" if its fact.

A fact must be proved. Which she could not.

[aqgalaxy]

Originally posted by Khyla

If they can pull a twist like that out of their @ss at the last second, why should I doubt they could pull off something they've been nurturing since the series inception? (like Chlois, maybe?)


Seriously Khyla? I thought if after 6 years they can make Chloe a meteor freak they can pull off Chlois.


Originally posted by Mello Penelo
A fact must be proved. Which she could not.

Yet her theory on the meteor rocks are proven... She was right.

[theotherJane]

Originally posted by Aries83
Because of this episode...I was a little upset she handed over that research to Lois, but this episode was almost flawlessly written, aside from Lana's scene with Clark at the Isis foundation, but I didn't mind Lois being up front. It also allowed Chloe to reveal her secret to Jimmy and in the process of displaying her power, she just became that much stronger to me and I feel ok that she isn't Lois. I also came out of it liking Jimmy a lot more, or should I say for the first time ever since he was introduced into the show. At this point, I don't think I would mind Clois; I know it's coming, but I have seen that Chloe can stand on her own. I guess I'll have to see, but for the moment, I'm content with it.

Welcome to reality.

[aqgalaxy]

Originally posted by theotherJane
Welcome to reality.

If EDLois is reality, I rather go back to sleep.

[Lostfan588]

Originally posted by Mello Penelo
A fact must be proved. Which she could not.

Give me an example?

[Mello Penelo]

Originally posted by aqgalaxy
Yet her theory on the meteor rocks are proven... She was right.

Then why is everyone other than Lex convinced it's the crap the Luthorcorp plant pumped into the environment?


Originally posted by Lostfan588
Give me an example?

Oh come on. Every time Chloe tried to prove one of her stories, Lex covered up the truth or the town blamed it on the Luthorcorp plant damaging the environment. Chloe could not prove one single meteor freak story, but yet, published them anyway.

There's a term for that in the media: abuse of editorial position.

Lois does the same thing and she's the bad guy?

[theotherJane]

Originally posted by aqgalaxy
If EDLois is reality, I rather go back to sleep.

Enjoy your long winter's nap! ;)

[Lostfan588]

Originally posted by Mello Penelo




Oh come on. Every time Chloe tried to prove one of her stories, Lex covered up the truth or the town blamed it on the Luthorcorp plant damaging the environment. Chloe could not prove one single meteor freak story, but yet, published them anyway.

There's a term for that in the media: abuse of editorial position.

Everytime? Not good enough. Give a specific example when Chloe printed someting that was not the truth.

If you know its the truth, and it can be proven, its a fact. You can use interviews to back it up too which is what Chloe did on many of her stories. Are you saying what Chloe printed was lies? Because if it's not, then its not a "tabloid"- tabloid journalism is what the Inquisitor or National Enquirer does- it doesn't care about the "truth" or reliable sources but rather spins the truth.

I'm a journalism student and work for a paper, so I do know what I'm talking about.

And while we're going there, the first thing you learn in Journalism 101 is, "If you can't meet deadline, you're in the wrong field."

This Lois doesn't have any of the prerequisites for the career, so it's a joke.

That's probably why she hasn't got anything published since she was handed the job at the Planet...


Originally posted by Mello Penelo


Lois does the same thing and she's the bad guy?


There's a difference, in her episodes so far, Lois hasn't cared as much about finding the actual truth before typing her stories. She takes everything at face value: The barndoor story? yep. The eclipse in "Blue? 'I'm sure there's a perfectly logical explanation behind it'....

Can't meet deadline...

Can't type...

I'm sorry, I just don't see how she's going to make it...

I honestly think Lex is toying with her here...

"Noir" foreshadowing is coming to the surface as well.

[Mello Penelo]

Originally posted by Lostfan588
I'm a journalism student and work for a paper, so I do know what I'm talking about.

And I'm not?


Originally posted by Lostfan588
Everytime? Not good enough. Give a specific example when Chloe printed someting that was not the truth.

Even as a journalist, you still don't understand what the truth is? Truth is what you can prove. I don't care if it really happened or not, but unless you can back it up, even a first-hand account can only be known as partiality and hearsay. Take a media law class.

[elway]

Originally posted by aqgalaxy
Proof lies with the dialog.

Considering Chloe knows about Lois being assigned the Expose, suggests that it was a few days ago that happened, and Grant was announcing it so..

Since then Lois didn't do any research, (Telling Chloe the information she handed her was her first real source) and only been making out with Grant in the closets of the Daily Planet.

Lex personally requests for Lois Lane to write the story knowing her incompetents. This is a recon to the Blue comment. If Lex was really worried about Lois as he described her in Blue, why would he request her to do the interview? Obviously he doesn't think of her as a threat.

Also the foreshadowing of Noir payed off. It foreshadowed Lex owning practically everything, he owns the DP now.

In Noir Chloe worked at the DP while Lois was some eyecandy for Lex (funny she was dating Lex's brother now...)

Then we have the Meta Episode Action. It foreshadows a reporter's death (Lois/Chloe's) and the other finishing their work. However a strike that it's Lois is the girl dies in the comics but lives in the movie. Reverse it, the girl lives in the comics but dies in Smallville.

Lois Lane was the one, despite warning from Grant and Chloe goes after Lex. She's over her head, especially now that he's her boss and she didn't see that coming.

Chloe gave Lois her research making anything written by Lois Lane Chloe's research, Chloe backs it up, meaning the article goes to Chloe should Lois Lane dies...

Also funny thing, Lois was forced to expose Lex by Adrian, she failed to do that. Despite her Military training and background, Lex knocked her out easily, so she failed.

Also Progeny, Chloe says "The story or me." well seems Like Lois is after the story so it'll be her who gets caught in Lex's crossairs. and Like Action "Someone else will expose him." and that someone is who was in the background, who was the main source of the article, the one who will ultimately take him down and that's Chloe Sullivan, and should Lois Lane die, Chloe will print the article still in lois Lane and take the pseudonym. Thus Chlois.

If they wanted it to be an Anti-Clois episode, they would have set it up where Chloe would die however that's not what is being hinted.

Man do you ppl reach and grasp for anything to try to convince ppl of your theory:rotfl:

LOIS IS LOIS ppl sorry and BTW I hate this arguement so PEACE

[Lostfan588]

Originally posted by Mello Penelo

Even as a journalist, you still don't understand what the truth is? Truth is what you can prove. I don't care if it really happened or not, but unless you can back it up, even a first-hand account can only be known as partiality and hearsay. Take a media law class.

I know exactly what the truth is, thankyou. The problem is that
you haven't given me any specific examples of a specific article Chloe published for which she did not have proof. As I said she witnessed these things for herself and had interviews with eyewitnesses to back her stories.

I would call working for the school paper as Chloe did, and working for a tabloid paper as Lois did, 2 completly different sides of journalism.

Since you are apparently a journalism student too, then, what do you think about a "Lois Lane" who can not type, meet deadline, or get stories published?

If Chloe is getting published at the Planet, which we have been shown onscreen, then her stories more than likely have that proof you are talking about.


Originally posted by elway
PEACE

PEACE. :lol:

[InLove_with_Chloe]

Originally posted by Mello Penelo
Truth is what you can prove.
Logically, that's not true - is it? What you can prove is a fact, and not the truth.
Sometimes the truth CANNOT be proven. Hence, humankind invented courts and judges to decide what the truth most likely is, case by case.....
;)

[Lostfan588]

Originally posted by InLove_with_Chloe
Logically, that's not true - is it? What you can prove is a fact, and not the truth.
Sometimes the truth CANNOT be proven. Hence, humankind invented courts and judges to decide what the truth most likely is, case by case.....
;)


Ahhhh ILWC...That's so true what you just said.

Too bad I can't prove it.

[InLove_with_Chloe]

See? Told 'ya....
:lol:

[Mello Penelo]

Originally posted by Lostfan588
The problem is that
you haven't given me any specific examples of a specific article Chloe published for which she did not have proof. As I said she witnessed these things for herself and had interviews with eyewitnesses to back her stories.

Dead people don't count as eyewitnesses. Everyone associated with meteor freaks and Clark die.

Anyway, as for examples, go back and watch Perry. He calls the paper a tabloid and Chloe defends herself. Perry then says, "Where's the proof?"


Originally posted by Lostfan588
If Chloe is getting published at the Planet, which we have been shown onscreen, then her stories more than likely have that proof you are talking about.

She's writing fluff and filler. Aside from one or two larger stories she's done, it's all been obits and city council.


Originally posted by Lostfan588
I would call working for the school paper as Chloe did, and working for a tabloid paper as Lois did, 2 completly different sides of journalism.

I worked at a tabloid for a semester. Have you ever been in one to know what goes on? I still had to hunt sources, interview, see their "pseudo-proof" and bring back documentation. Working for a tabloid makes me no less of a journalist, thank you very much.


Originally posted by Lostfan588
I know exactly what the truth is, thankyou.

Then prove it.

Want an example? Our (now former) mayor was a philanderer and a coke-fiend. He'd even snort in public. One time I even saw him doing a line in the park. But I didn't have a camera or my phone with me to take a picture of it because I was out for a run. My word alone could not be used to haul him into jail. The truth is relative. He got caught in the act a few weeks ago and now there's concrete proof to back it up.


Originally posted by Lostfan588
Since you are apparently a journalism student too, then, what do you think about a "Lois Lane" who can not time, meet deadline, or get stories published?

Human. Copy editors exist for a reason. It's the copy editor's fault for not coaching her into having better spelling. And Lois has met her deadlines every time, but been vetoed at the editor level. They get vetoed because they're too close to Grant and his involvement with the Luthors.

[InLove_with_Chloe]

If I remember well, then the Austrian/British philosopher Karl Popper has actually proven that the truth DOES NOT EXIST. That is no joke. To be precise he showed that if the truth existed, we would not be able to tell with certainty that it is indeed the truth. Neat, no? He therefore introduced the term of Verisimilitude (I have discussed that around here before......), which is really great: we should therefore try to increase the degree of verisimilitude of our statements rather than discuss truth per se.
;)

[Odysseus]

I just want to say that I was happy to see the Chlo-Lo interaction back this episode, with Lois and Chloe chatting (we haven't really seen that since the season began) and Lois desperately trying to tip Chloe off about the bomb and save her cousin's life.

See guys? Chloe and Lois coexist perfectly as separate characters. There's no need to ruin both characters by having one replace the other in very creepy way. (If your cousin died, would you suddenly dye your hair to match your deceased cousin's hair color and start prancing around calling yourself by your cousin's name? Come on, that theory's just plain creepy if you think of it that way :lol: )


Originally posted by elway
Man do you ppl reach and grasp for anything to try to convince ppl of your theory:rotfl:

LOIS IS LOIS ppl sorry and BTW I hate this arguement so PEACE

yup. seriously, I think a lot of the theorists put a lot more thought into these random bits of dialogue than AlMiles do, and find hidden meanings that aren't really there.

Come on guys, Chloe Sullivan and Lois Lane are two (separate) and cool characters. They make a great team, and it's fun to watch them both. :)

[Lostfan588]

Originally posted by Mello Penelo
Dead people don't count as eyewitnesses. Everyone associated with meteor freaks and Clark die.

Anyway, as for examples, go back and watch Perry. He calls the paper a tabloid and Chloe defends herself. Perry then says, "Where's the proof?"



And? Did they die? What did they die of? What were the reasons behind it? Those are the ?'s Chloe goes for- and whether or the person is living, does it make their story any less true?

As ILWC said and I completly agree, journalism can only present the public with facts- and hope that with these facts the reader can arrive at the the truth. It strives for the truth.

Okay, so apparently you don't have any proof for me. Since you called Chloe's work "tabloid", I want a specific article Chloe has published that was sensationalized and did not have proof.

Because tabloid writing is intentionallt sensationalized, and only loosely based off of truths....is that what you actually think The Torch was? I sure don't.


Originally posted by Mello Penelo



Human. Copy editors exist for a reason. It's the copy editor's fault for not coaching her into having better spelling. And Lois has met her deadlines every time, but been vetoed at the editor level. They get vetoed because they're too close to Grant and his involvement with the Luthors.

That's not what Grant said in "Blue". She didn't meet deadline.

Apparently copy writers exist at the DP, but only for every other reporter except Lois....


Originally posted by Odysseus


Come on guys, Chloe Sullivan and Lois Lane are two (separate) and cool characters.

I agree with you. Chloe isn't Lois. But I still see SV as an AU, and in this AU, Lois is not a very impressive reporter. Just sayin'...

[Mello Penelo]

Originally posted by Lostfan588
Okay, so apparently you don't have any proof for me. Since you called Chloe's work "tabloid", I want a specific article Chloe has published that was not TRUE and did not have proof.

Because I don't want to go back and watch Perry, I'm telling you to watch it again. He said the stories were crap because they were false. She told him they weren't. He told her to prove it.

The reason he was working for that Ripley's Believe it Or Not-esque show was because he could not prove what he wrote, regardless of how true it was.


Originally posted by Lostfan588
And? Did they die? What did they die of? What were the reasons behind it? Those are the ?'s Chloe goes for- and whether or the person is living, does it make their story any less true?

But when the coroner's report shows they died of benign things like falling or getting shot, Chloe's theories, no matter how true they are from firsthand accounts or interviews or not, does not mean it should be published.


Originally posted by Lostfan588
Because tabloid writing is intentionallt sensationalized, and only loosely based off of truths....is that what you actually think The Torch was? I sure don't.

The Torch was more like an old-fashioned newspaper from the 20s. More concerned with the shock value than the truth. Watch Citizen Kane.

[Lostfan588]

Originally posted by Mello Penelo

But when the coroner's report shows they died of benign things like falling or getting shot, Chloe's theories, no matter how true they are from firsthand accounts or interviews or not, does not mean it should be published.

The Torch was more like an old-fashioned newspaper from the 20s. More concerned with the shock value than the truth. Watch Citizen Kane.

Fine. I respect your opinion, but we'll just have to agree to disagree.

My main argument with you was that The Torch was not a tabloid.

Tabloids sensationalize.

You haven't given me any proof Chloe sensationalized or exagerrated the news.

So, I'm not convinced. But you are entitled to your opinion.


Originally posted by Mello Penelo
Watch Citizen Kane.

I've heard of that! Well lol I do love old films...is it any good? Maybe I will! :lol:

[Mello Penelo]

Originally posted by Lostfan588
You haven't given me any proof Chloe sensationalized or exagerrated the news.

And Perry isn't proof? (I went to look through the episode guides from the former seasons and my DVD tower collapsed. :lol: So I just came back here and referenced Perry. But it's there if you take a look. I have a pile of DVDs on the floor. :lol: )


Originally posted by Lostfan588
I've heard of that! Well lol I do love old films...is it any good? Maybe I will! :lol:

Yeah, it's an amazing film. I watch it a few times a year. Really, really, REALLY do yourself a favor and rent it. :D

[lillie_poo_pod]

Originally posted by Mello Penelo
Because I don't want to go back and watch Perry, I'm telling you to watch it again. He said the stories were crap because they were false. She told him they weren't. He told her to prove it.

I've been reading your arguement here and I was trying to recall that scene. Since I couldn't I went searching for the transcript:

Clark and Perry look at the Wall of Weird in the Torch office. Day.

Clark: I think we should go.

Perry: Boy, I thought our stuff was off the wall This is incredible.

Chloe enters.

Chloe: It's also all true.

Clark: Chloe. Mr. White is interested in the meteor shower. I didn't think it would hurt if he had a look.

Chloe: I have nothing to hide.

Perry: Well, good. I think we've already borrowed two or three of your ideas for our show. Do you make it all up yourself, or do you pull in other writers?

Chloe glances at Clark.

Chloe: Excuse me?

Perry: [Handing Chloe his business card.] Oh, just, uh, professional curiosity. It's not every day that I meet another junk journalist with a penchant for the bizarre.

Chloe sees "XStyles" on the card.

Chloe: "XStyles"?

Perry: Yeah.

Chloe: [Annoyed.] I have a penchant for the truth, something your freaks and shrieks cable show gave up around episode two.

Perry: [Laughing, impressed.] Oooh.

Clark: That's it. We're done.

Clark and Perry start to leave. Chloe looks more closely at the business card and sees the name Perry White.

Chloe: Wait, wait, wait, wait.

Clark and Perry turn back to Chloe.

Chloe: You're *the* Perry White?

Perry looks at Chloe for a moment, then back to Clark.

Perry: [Scheming.] It's okay, Clark. I'm gonna hoof it back to the motel. Uh, you young lovers patch things up, and then later on you can swing by and we'll pick up the tour, hmm?

Perry leaves.

Chloe: Clark, do you have any idea who that was?

Clark looks at Chloe blankly. She continues to look at him in shock
I'm not seeing your description of that scene in the transcript.

Also, I don't think Chloe had the chance to prove that it was all true to Perry because Clark jumped into the conversation.

[Lostfan588]

Thankyou Lillie!

Yeah, I'm not seeing what she's saying either.

I think she must have remembered it wrong because THIS:

Perry: Oh, just, uh, professional curiosity. It's not every day that I meet another junk journalist with a penchant for the bizarre.

Chloe sees "XStyles" on the card.

Chloe: "XStyles"?

Perry: Yeah.

Chloe: I have a penchant for the truth, something your freaks and shrieks cable show gave up around episode two.


Just goes to show yet again how Chloe emphasizes the search for the truth on the show. And I'm not seeing him accusing her work tabloid trash or anything, just that he admires her curiosity for the Bizarre and she quickly defends her articles as truth NOT sensationalism like his work is.

[Mello Penelo]

Ok, example 2. From Thirst.

Pauline Khan said: Oh, it's a good hmm, if we printed tabliod nonsense like the Inquisitor does, but we're the Daily Planet and tall tales about slaying Buffy the vampire don't make it into the pages of a real newspaper.

Chloe knew the story was the truth, but Luthorcorp's involvement was pushed under the rug. The CDC even proved those girls had bat-bites, but not that they were meteor infected vampirellas. Khan didn't print it, not because the story was crap, but because it wasn't provable.

Whether it happened or not, because it really happened, doesn't mean it's the truth.

[lillie_poo_pod]

Originally posted by Mello Penelo

Chloe knew the story was the truth, but Luthorcorp's involvement was pushed under the rug. The CDC even proved those girls had bat-bites, but not that they were meteor infected vampirellas. Khan didn't print it, not because the story was crap, but because it wasn't provable.
:confused: Khan hired Chloe because she was able to prove the story, with CDC reports, eyewitness accounts, ect. Chloe showed Khan all her proof after she said the whole tabloid nonsense line.

[InLove_with_Chloe]

Exactly. She was trying to provoke her by accusing her of writing tabloid-style. To see how she would react.

[ma200]

Originally posted by lillie_poo_pod
:confused: Khan hired Chloe because she was able to prove the story, with CDC reports, eyewitness accounts, ect. Chloe showed Khan all her proof after she said the whole tabloid nonsense line.

Kahn was well aware that the story was backed up with proof even before she crapped on it. I'm sure Chloe is smart enough to state her sources in her story before handing it to Kahn.

It was a tabloid regardless of whether or not it was backed up by legitimate sources simply because the story gave off a vampire vibe.

[InLove_with_Chloe]

Originally posted by ma200
It was a tabloid regardless of whether or not it was backed up by legitimate sources simply because the story gave off a vampire vibe.
No, I think it would have been a tabloid article, had Chloe claimed that these people are indeed Vampires. Which of course she did not do........she came up with a reasonable explanation for the observed phenomena. Backed up with facts.

[ma200]

Originally posted by InLove_with_Chloe
No, I think it would have been a tabloid article, had Chloe claimed that these people are indeed Vampires. Which of course she did not do........she came up with a reasonable explanation for the observed phenomena. Backed up with facts.

To Kahn, it was a story about vampires rather than a story about people suffering from a disease. It doesn't matter what Chloe thinks and it doesn't matter what Chloe intended for her story to be about. The point is Chloe didn't do a good job writing the story the way Kahn wanted.

[InLove_with_Chloe]

So, why was she hired then?
:lol:
See, as I said before: Kahn was trying to provoke her.......she gave her a rough treatment, which only makes sense at the world's leading newspaper.
Kahn was obviously impressed - otherwise she wouldn't have hired her. The story, however, was indeed crappy....... I mean, there is only so much you can make out of it (remember the SV writers almost lost their minds over 'thirst'!!! :lol: )......

[ma200]

Originally posted by InLove_with_Chloe
So, why was she hired then?
:lol:
See, as I said before: Kahn was trying to provoke her.......she gave her a rough treatment, which only makes sense at the world's leading newspaper.


So you think Kahn is lying when she accused Chloe of writing a tabloid?

Kahn never published Chloe's story.


Kahn was obviously impressed - otherwise she wouldn't have hired her.

Honestly, I don't know why Kahn hired her. She said Chloe's story was crap but she's not without talent :confused: :confused: :confused: What does that mean? What kind of critique is that? I mean you can't insult someone's work and hire that person without giving a good legitimate reason. So in the end, I just call it a lightswitch.

[InLove_with_Chloe]

Originally posted by ma200
So you think Kahn is lying when she accused Chloe of writing a tabloid?

Kahn never published Chloe's story.

I honestly don't think Chloe expected her to publish it......she knew the story was weak. But she made the most out of it. And Kahn saw that. Yet still, she accused her of writing tabloid-style, to see how Chloe would react. That's a very well known technique at job interviews, actually. It tells you a lot about your potential future emplyoye, how he/she reacts in such a situation. And Chloe was always good at defending her work, IMO.

[Mello Penelo]

See? This is what I'm trying to say. People give Lois a hard time for getting a job at the Daily Planet on a story about a UFO. She could prove it just the same as Chloe could prove her vampire story, but no, Lois isn't Chloe and everyone should hate her. :\

[ma200]

Originally posted by InLove_with_Chloe
I honestly don't think Chloe expected her to publish it......she knew the story was weak. But she made the most out of it. And Kahn saw that. Yet still, she accused her of writing tabloid-style, to see how Chloe would react. That's a very well known technique at job interviews, actually. It tells you a lot about your potential future emplyoye, how he/she reacts in such a situation. And Chloe was always good at defending her work, IMO.

You're not really making any sense. You say that Chloe's story was weak and still say that Kahn accused her of writing a tabloid just to provoke her. Ok, why was Chloe's story weak then according to you?

[InLove_with_Chloe]

Originally posted by ma200
You're not really making any sense. You say that Chloe's story was weak and still say that Kahn accused her of writing a tabloid just to provoke her. Ok, why was Chloe's story weak then according to you?
Well, you obviously didn't read my posts right...... The story was weak, yes. It wasn't exactly Watergate, you know? There was just that much Chloe could make out of it, especially in such a short time......and I think she did her job well. And so did Kahn.


Originally posted by Mello Penelo
See? This is what I'm trying to say. People give Lois a hard time for getting a job at the Daily Planet on a story about a UFO. She could prove it just the same as Chloe could prove her vampire story, but no, Lois isn't Chloe and everyone should hate her. :\
I can't comment on Lois, cause I stopped watching. All I know is she had no problems writing about the Chupacabra, while employed at the Inquisitor. I doubt Chloe would've done that....

[ma200]

Well, you obviously didn't read my posts right...... The story was weak, yes. It wasn't exactly Watergate, you know? There was just that much Chloe could make out of it, especially in such a short time......and I think she did her job well. And so did Kahn.

Chloe intended for the story to be about people suffering from a disease. Sounds like a story that readers deserve to know about. It's not Watergate but still seems like it could be made into a good story. The only problem is that Chloe made it sound like a story about vampires and Kahn pointed that out.

I’m getting a feeling that we’re talking in circles here.

[InLove_with_Chloe]

Originally posted by ma200
Chloe intended for the story to be about people suffering from a disease. Sounds like a story that readers deserve to know about. It's not Watergate but still seems like it could be made into a good story. The only problem is that Chloe made it sound like a story about vampires and Kahn pointed that out.
Well, the diseased people in question were sucking blood, weren't they???
:lol:

[Mello Penelo]

Originally posted by ma200
Chloe intended for the story to be about people suffering from a disease. Sounds like a story that readers deserve to know about. It's not Watergate but still seems like it could be made into a good story. The only problem is that Chloe made it sound like a story about vampires and Kahn pointed that out.

I’m getting a feeling that we’re talking in circles here.

Ok, here's the thing. Chloe was still in Torch mode when she wrote that story. Her angle was the vampires.

Now that she's trying to repair her credibility from writing for the Torch (don't attack me, she even said it in Kara) and growing up and tossing away childish things, her angle on that story would probably be about girls suffering from a rabies-like virus, which manifested itself in a weird way.

[InLove_with_Chloe]

Truly weird, I agree. AlMiles-weird.
:lol:

[harryandginnyfanatic]

Did you know that in the comics after buying the DP Lex specifically asked that Lois be kept on staff?

He eventually made a deal with Lois and agreed to sell the paper to Bruce Wayne.

I'm sorry. But with the Sadie Blodgett reference in Action and this new storyline, which I assume is probably part of Lois's 'big arc' that had been confirmed by AlMiles, this theory makes even less sense than it did before.

Lois is Lois.

[ma200]

Originally posted by Mello Penelo
Ok, here's the thing. Chloe was still in Torch mode when she wrote that story. Her angle was the vampires.

Now that she's trying to repair her credibility from writing for the Torch (don't attack me, she even said it in Kara) and growing up and tossing away childish things, her angle on that story would probably be about girls suffering from a rabies-like virus, which manifested itself in a weird way.

Yeah, I agree. Her writing would've improved. Too bad she's losing focus.

[InLove_with_Chloe]

Originally posted by harryandginnyfanatic
Lois is Lois.
Yeah, but which one??? That's the question.....
:lol: