MrCurious

Articles in top-quality media, e.g. NYT, NYer, etc, often include details that are totally irrelevant to the story, such as what a subject or interviewee looks like, what beverage said interviewee was drinking when approached, etc. And I've found that writers who do that almost always overlook details that would add understanding to a story, such as the individual's education, formative events in background, etc. Does anyone know if there is any actual data showing that readers appreciate these irrelevant details? Everyone I know finds that practice annoying.

I'm trying to learn the name of a NYTimes journalist fired several years ago for being a poor writer. The Times hired this journalist, then "discovered" that his writing required a LOT of editing. He subsequently left the Times, or was canned, and went to some other outfit. I am fairly sure he was writing about pop culture in some way. If this is not the proper forum for this question, please let me know, and if possible suggest a better forum. Thanks to all.