Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Enquirer issues major correction

Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati

Photo courtesy of here.

After sending our request for a correction yesterday morning, The Enquirer has done the right thing—issuing a lengthy correction to its recent endorsement of John McCain.  At the same time, their explanation of how the mistake was made in the first place casts suspicion into what kind of sources the paper finds it reasonable to cite during the course of daily business.  Viral emails should never be utilized by a major daily paper as the source for a quotation.  The fact they published the widely circulated misquote should be a grave lesson to everyone involved.

After sending my original letter yesterday, I was copied on this response:

Callinan, Tom Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 6:40 AM
To: [The Dean of Cincinnati], “Wells, David”
David:

The phrase was used in the Sunday editorial with direct quote marks.

Please discuss with Ray.

Thanks

It would appear my letter was the first they received, since Callinan was directing David Wells to discuss the matter with Ray Cooklis.  Here are some excerpts from today’s correction:

A large number of readers have graciously pointed out an error of attribution in Sunday’s presidential endorsement. We’d like to set the record straight on that point.

A quote in the editorial that was attributed to Sen. Barack Obama – “A strong government hand is needed to assure that wealth is distributed more equitably” – was in fact not uttered by the Democratic presidential candidate. Instead, that phrase was part of an article written by two Wall Street Journal reporters, paraphrasing Obama’s comments in a June interview with the candidate on economic policy. Unfortunately, a number of bloggers and columnists subsequently picked up the phrase, erroneously attributing the quote directly to Obama. As did we.

While the paper does not give the following as an “excuse,” I am concerned that they would quote a viral email in a major endorsement:

This incident illustrates, but does not excuse us from, one of the perils of the online information age. Statements and facts can easily be lifted out of context, altered, repeated and circulated “virally” throughout the Web, to the point where inaccurate information can sometimes become accepted as true. One of the valuable tools for ferreting out such inaccuracies is the Snopes site, http://www.snopes.com, which does have an entry devoted to the quote in question.

So kudos to The Enquirer for correcting their error, but what an error to have made in the first place!

• Share This Article!
Listen to this article

Socializer!

Username

Password

Auto-login on future visits

Show my name in the online users list

Forgot your password?

Register

Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.

If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.

says:
29 Oct 2008  at  09:22 am | #

Kudo’s at least Tom Callinan got back with you.  When I attempted to contact him in regards to a story written by Sharon Coolidge--no response.

I long ago stopped respecting the Enqui-liar as a credible news source.  Writers like Sharon Coolidge, Kimball Perry, and Jane Prendergast write stories that one would expect from a tabloid paper.  And the columnist Peter Bronson should have taken the deal to leave the paper.

And this latest interview with Cincinnati’s Best loved Republican clown--Bill Cunningham is….wow! Did anybody read that?

Next month the Enquirer is going from daily rate of 50 cents to 75 cents. As it stands I NEVER purchase the paper, regrettably and occasionally, I read it online or when I’m in my bank or somewhere where the paper is free to read.

FOLD ENQUIRER. FOLD.

anon says:
29 Oct 2008  at  08:46 pm | #

The mistake wasn’t in the quote - the mistake was in the endorcement of McCain.

This type of mistake speaks volumns as to the “sources” the Enquirer uses and portrays as reliable.  They might as well just copy the McCain campaign pre-written endorcement. 

Another incident comes to mind that the Beacon exposed.  Remember when the paper denied any election problems in Ohio and they claimed reliable sources told them everything was hunky dory?

Anyway, good job Beacon

anon says:
30 Oct 2008  at  05:42 am | #

Remember when the paper denied any election problems in Ohio and they claimed reliable sources told them everything was hunky dory?

To be specific, “they” was politics editor Carl Weiser who told Editor & Publisher reporter Joe Strupp that the Enquirer had relied on experts to arrive at the conclusion that the 2000 Presidential election count in Ohio was clean. When the Beacon asked Weiser to provide the names of those alleged experts, he refused.

From Weiser’s online bio, here’s what he wrote about himself: http://tinyurl.com/5fynva

I am passionate about: The truth

Would that be “seeking” or “avoiding”?

Toronto condominiums says:
21 Nov 2008  at  04:42 pm | #

I long ago stopped respecting the Enqui-liar as a credible news source.  Writers like Sharon Coolidge, Kimball Perry, and Jane Prendergast write stories that one would expect from a tabloid paper.

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

<b>

<i>

<u>

quote

code

@

<a>

Close Tags

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below: