Lest I be accused of hypocrisy, let me begin by saying that I am not generally a big fan of the fourth estate a.k.a "the press". It is rather appropriate that this blog was in part inspired by the greatest president of the 20th century, because this post concerns modern-day muckraking. I have attached an article I read this evening on Slate discussing how the New York Times failed to admit its own mistakes in covering the story of the Duke lacrosse players charged with raping a stripper at an off-campus party. This paper, along with every other media form, purport to be the only honest, objective purveyors of truth keeping all of us safe from our lying and corrupt elected officials and the sleazy corporations that support them. However, when their own mistakes, shaky facts, and outright lies are exposed they do not provide the hubris they claim to be trying to get from politicians and business leaders. Oh no, instead they try to hide it, cover it up, wish it away, or bury a small retraction somewhere deep inside their publications.
Let's imagine that the muckraker who covered this story for The Times standing in front of a microphone answering questions from a group of reporters. A snapshot of it would probably look something like this:
Reporter1: "Ms. Lady, how do you respond to the allegations that you rushed this story to the front page, along with the accused’s pictures, even though you had strong evidence suggesting that the accusations might be false?"
Grey Lady: "I don't. We were operating on the best information we had at the time, and felt that we had to get this story out immediately for the good of this nation. What was to stop these suspects from running right out, hiring another stripper for another party, and then possibly raping her? Sometimes one doesn't have all the information one would like in these matters. Next question."
Reporter2: "Excuse me, Ms. Lady but are you now willing to admit that you made a mistake in reporting this story?"
Grey Lady: "Absolutely not. Do I wish we had more and better information at the time? Sure. However, our reporters and editors acted on the best information they had at the time and we are professionals who throughout this entire story have maintained our objectivity. We cannot be held accountable for everything that is said in our paper."
Well, I digress. Please, be my guest and read the Slate article for yourself.
http://www.slate.com/id/2151507/?GT1=8702
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Sounds like the Bush administration defending their decision invade Iraq. It's human nature to not want to accept blame for a mistake or ignore criticism. However, leadership, whether from an administration, newspaper or anybody for that matter, takes honesty and the guts to admit a mistake was made and that you'll work twice as hard to make sure it is handled better in the future.
Post a Comment