We have been reading our daughter Lauren “Charlotte’s Web.” Tonight Mrs. P. was doing the reading, and she just got to the part where Charlotte dies. I could tell because I heard both of them crying.
Hugh Hewitt has redesigned his site. The best part is that he finally has at least one RSS feed that works. The best feed — and the only one that appears to be up to date — is this one. Subscribe to it on your Bloglines account right now by clicking this button:
It’s been four days since an L.A. Times editorial claimed:
Roberts has long been a member of the Washington establishment, and a fixture in the Federalist Society.
It’s been three days since I wrote them to point out the error.
Yet no correction of the editorial has issued. True, two days ago the paper issued a correction regarding a similar claim in a news story. But that doesn’t count as a correction of the editorial. Part of the point of a correction is to acknowledge error. The paper has not acknowledged the error in the editorial. And no correction has issued on the editorial page, where errors in editorials run.
I heard back from the Reader’s Representative on Friday about this issue. She acknowledged that the previous correction of the news story did not function as a correction of the editorial:
I pointed out to editorial-page editors today’s correction and their editorial saying that he was a “fixture” – I’ll let you know how they respond. Corrections on editorials and opinions have to run in that section, actually, so today’s correction wasn’t intended to apply to any other reference in the paper. [Patterico notes: I’m not sure why Ms. Gold uses the word “actually” here, as if she is informing me of something I didn’t know. I made this exact point in my note to her.]
The correction that ran didn’t go through this office – I wasn’t aware of it until I saw it already written – you might want to send a note to the reporters to ask them about the origin of this error. One wonders if it was just a series of people, journalists included, making assumptions (which is what I got from the Post story). …
Ms. Gold here makes a refreshingly frank and remarkable admission: even journalists make assumptions! It’s something that we all know, but that journalists will rarely admit. After all, they have all those fact-checkers! Every assertion is checked out by numerous editors! They have standards that bloggers don’t have!
Evidently, those standards require them to take several days to decide whether it’s an error to say that someone is a “fixture in the Federalist Society” when they’re not even a member.
By contrast, responsible bloggers publish corrections at lightning speed — as soon as they become aware of errors.
I’ll stick to blogging standards, thanks.
P.S. I’m going to take Ms. Gold up on her suggestion and send a note to the reporters who wrote the news story that made the same error, to ask them where they got their information about Roberts’s purported membership in the Federalist Society. I won’t be holding my breath waiting for a response — but if I get one, I’ll be sure to let you know . . .
Who is to blame for the London terror bombings? The terrorists themselves, of course.
But isn’t there a secondary cause? Aren’t there Westerners whose public statements contributed to the resentments felt by the bombers?
The answer is yes.
The leftists like Dick Durbin who exaggerated the interrogation practices at Guantanamo.
Jeff Goldstein explains. (Via Baldilocks.)