Comments on: L.A. Times Still Will Not Correct Story on Cummins

By: See Dubya

See Dubya — Fri, 11 May 2007 22:22:17 +0000

Patterico, can you read minds?

I didn’t think so.

The LA Times can, all right? It’s why they get to have a newspaper.

So cut them some slack here, tough guy. You’re out of your league.

By: Greg

Greg — Fri, 11 May 2007 17:58:53 +0000

Another option is to just bypass the MSM altogether if you are ever in the position of being sought out for interviews. Make a point of being available to alternative media (such as blogs and perhaps some talk radio) and just refuse to talk to the MSM.

By: semanticleo

semanticleo — Fri, 11 May 2007 15:43:35 +0000

By: Patterico

Patterico — Fri, 11 May 2007 14:02:47 +0000

aunursa,

That’s a pretty good idea.

By: TCO

TCO — Fri, 11 May 2007 13:53:06 +0000

And this also goes to show that you should always tape-record any interview with the media. (And ask for questions ahead of time.)

By: aunursa

aunursa — Fri, 11 May 2007 13:37:03 +0000

Here’s an idea for a blog entry. Post statements by the LA Times (and the rest of the MSM) in which they criticize politicians and celebrities for refusing to acknowledge or apologize for their mistakes. Then compare it with instances such as this when the Times et al. refuse to acknowledge or apologize for an obvious mistake.

By: Crust

Crust — Fri, 11 May 2007 13:27:54 +0000

Words of wisdom from TCO.

By: TCO

TCO — Fri, 11 May 2007 13:24:26 +0000

You’ve had this type of problem before and you just don’t get it, Pat. On questions of basic fact mistakes, the Times will publish corrections. On arguable points, “thoughts”, differing phraseology or emphasis, inferences, etc. (”higher level thoughts”), they won’t publish a correction. You should write a letter to the editor (or Cummins should). Corrections is not how they want to handle these types of disputes. Corrections are for black and white fact mistakes. Deal with it.

By: Crust

Crust — Fri, 11 May 2007 13:04:25 +0000

The whole attitude of much of the MSM to corrections is just amazing. The low point for me was an email from Calame of the New York Times after he’d refused a request for correction without explanation. I asked him if it would be unreasonable of me to ask him to explain his basis for standing by the claim. He replied “yes” (and added some words about how the reporter in question is a reasonable man). Lese majeste, I don’t know how else to describe it.