Patterico's Pontifications

11/3/2006

NYT Issues Correction of Piece on Kerry Remarks

Filed under: General,Media Bias — Patterico @ 12:00 am



The New York Times has corrected its misstatement about John Kerry’s “stuck in Iraq” remarks. The correction reads:

A Political Memo article yesterday about the fallout for Senator John Kerry over what he called a “botched joke” referred incompletely to the differences between prepared remarks and what he actually said about the Iraq war to students at Pasadena City College in California on Monday. Mr. Kerry not only dropped the word “us,” but he also rephrased his opening sentence extensively and omitted a reference to President Bush. Mr. Kerry’s aides said that the prepared text read: “Do you know where you end up if you don’t study, if you aren’t smart, if you’re intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush.” What he said: “You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”

As of the time of this post, the correction has not been appended to the original piece.

UPDATE 6:20 a.m.: The correction has been appended.

29 Responses to “NYT Issues Correction of Piece on Kerry Remarks”

  1. Good one, P.

    See Dubya (806435)

  2. A Palpable Hit!…

    Patterico scores a broadside on the New York Times and makes them issue a correction. Oh, they don’t mention him by name, but that post has gathered a lot of attention. I think he deserves some big-time credit…….

    JunkYardBlog (621918)

  3. That’s a big bloody correction.

    Patterico, I’m sure Charles Johnson wouldn’t mind if you uploaded this image to your server and appended it to your post as an update.

    It’s totally relevant, is a great explanational visual, and really belongs here.

    Everyone, please see that image and Charles Johnson’s post here for how much editing and convoluted lying rationalization is needed to believe those were really John Kerry’s prepared remarks.

    Christoph (9824e6)

  4. Out of idle curiosity … did they issue the correction on their website alone – or also in the print version?

    And if there was correction in print – what page of the paper was it on? Is anyone going to see it, or understand the point?

    Cristoph – get a job. And quit staying up so late on school nights. You’re obsessed, kid.

    Professor Blather (c65bfa)

  5. Where’s the skepticism of the press on the Kerry explanation? It is just not credible to think that he meant to say, ‘if you don’t study, you end up as president of the United States where you can make bad decisions.’

    He didn’t set out to disparage the troops. He intended to say that if you don’t get an education, then you will end up in the worst position that he can think of. Unfortunately for him, the worst position that he can think of is to volunteer to serve your country and defend us from our enemies.

    Mike S (d3f5fd)

  6. We are to believe Kerry’s staff that the following transcript was not written after the gaff. This is a CVA>

    art zimmerman (d9fb02)

  7. We’d better keep discussing this. Obviously, this WAS NOT A WANTON ERROR. The Enemy planned this to a “t”, and we must be alert if we are to counter such wicked moves in the future.

    The NY Times, make a mistake? That’s just not plausible. I smell a rat, P… and I’m counting on you to sniff it out.

    Leviticus (43095b)

  8. Why does Kate Zernike still have a job? Is this seriously the “best” the journalism community has to offer?

    No wonder the paper is hemmorhaging readers, advertising revenue, stock value and circulation.

    Good Lt (e17e11)

  9. The papers are all racing each other to the bottom in both content and influence. The Orange County Register dedicated its Sunday issue to NYT and AP reprints about Iraq, with pictures of all men who died there in the last month, all obviously partisan to defeat the evil Rethuglicans November 6.

    The LAT is still leading the cancellation derby at an 8% loss, but the NYT and the Register, its clone, are neck and neck at nearly 4%. It appears we will all live long enough to see these propaganda mongers destroyed.

    Patricia (2cc180)

  10. Here’s the link for Editor and Publisher stats.

    Patricia (2cc180)

  11. Way to go Patterico. Pat on the back for forcing a correction from the NYT. They must have lied for partisan purposes. Why? The evidence? Because it fits in with the belief in the “liberal media” evidense be damned. Congratulations also for forcing the NYT correction on their lie from monday about Nancy Pelosi, “She favors alternative sentencing over prison construction, schools without prayer, and death with taxes.” The NYT went on to somewhat correct that lie thanks to the outrage expressed by Patterico and his…………oh wait. Sorry. Patterico and his commentors had nothing to say about that. Must have confused him with another site who was not so partisan and willing to blow a story out of all proportion for political gain.

    Hey guys, I’ll play Karnac for you now and predict exactly when you will stop obsessing over this Kerry story. When the Bush propaganda show moves on to the pre-programmed Hussein sentencing show. You all tune in now. Pappy Bush has got some nice front row seats for anyone willing to ignore anything important and obsess in the agreed manner for the last two days before the election. See you there, not.

    Paul (24af80)

  12. I suspect the L.A. Times reader’s rep has a big grin on his face today. I wouldn’t be surprised if the L.A. Times offers Patterico a free subscription to the N.Y. Times.

    TomHynes (c41bdd)

  13. I agree with Paul. P, you’ve done 10 posts on this subject in the last 3-4 days: Why? Nobody here really wants to defend Kerry anyway. There’s an extremely important election in less than a week…move on, man.

    Leviticus (43095b)

  14. The NYT correction is still misleading because it states as fact (“he also rephrased his opening sentence extensively and omitted a reference to President Bush”) what is Kerry’s after-the-fact assertion. This assertion remains unsupported by contemporaneous documents.

    wile e coyote (9f1aba)

  15. It’s entirely consistent with the national media standard:
    “Fake but accurate”

    Accurate: (defn) not exactly true, but what we fantasize as true.

    Kathy (c02b80)

  16. There’s an extremely important election in less than a week…

    Bingo. These posts are about the Times. About Kerry? Not so much.

    This would seem obvious. Say, you’re not one of our, um…challenged G.I.’s. are you?

    Thanks for your service, Corky.

    spongeworthy (45b30e)

  17. Spongeworthy hits the nail on the head. These postings that the left is complaining about, are on the newspapers, not on Kerry. There is a difference.

    G (722480)

  18. Yeh right G. These postings are not about Kerry the same way a nudie bar is not about the T and A.
    It’s about the beer right? Do you even read the posts and comments? Kerry lied. Kerry did not apologize. Kerry hates the troops. Kerry always says these things. Kerry, Kerry, Kerry.

    Patterico’s latest post is “A fictional dialogue involving John Kerry that sounds quite real.” Does not mention any newspaper. All about Kerry.

    Patterico’s post yesterday “John Kerry makes a funny.” Does not talk about newspapers except in the update.

    Patterico can talk about Kerry till the cows come home and we can tell him what we think about it as he has graciously given us the opportunity to comment here. Thank You.

    Paul (24af80)

  19. John Kerry making a repeated ass out of himself isn’t the main point. Its the lack of attention that it recieved in the media. Then there’s a coverup in the NYT! Anyway, sorry, but after all the attention that sick Mark Foley got, what was it 3 weeks worth of news? What a bogus news event that was.

    G (722480)

  20. G, the lack of attention that this has received in the media? Now you are not just drinking the coolaid, you are mainlining it.

    Paul (24af80)

  21. Oh, its covered NOW, after it was well circulated in the blogs. Not to mention that the MSM tried to bury the story as best they could. The thing is, it actually is pretty important what he said, at least to most people anyway.

    G (722480)

  22. Patterico’s latest post is “A fictional dialogue involving John Kerry that sounds quite real.” Does not mention any newspaper. All about Kerry.

    Patterico’s post yesterday “John Kerry makes a funny.” Does not talk about newspapers except in the update.

    Perhaps the complaints belong in those threads. And Kerry is getting a free pass from the media, though they pretty much are forced to run the story. Just their version of the story.

    And no, I don’t think we will shut up about it, either.

    spongeworthy (45b30e)

  23. Keep on it spongeworthy.

    Like I said in comment 12, till the Hussein verdict comes down.

    Paul (aeea58)

  24. Congrats, Patterico, on getting a prompt correction. One quibble – the Times listed this correction under the category of “For the Record”, which is supposed to represent corrections of no material significance. It didn’t belong there. E.g., the correction above involved the year of death of P. J. Botha’s first wife.

    David (99dea3)

  25. I thought it was particularly amusing that the “correction” says that the original Times article “referred incompletely to the differences between prepared remarks and what [Kerry] actually said…”

    This has to be the MOAB of euphemisms. “Referred incompletely to the differences” must be Times Newspeak for “we totally re-wrote what the guy said to make him look far better.”

    Ironically, the Times’ “correction” fits perfectly with Kerry’s non-apology: ‘We didn’t do anything seriously wrong, you guys just didn’t understand correctly.’

    With standards like these, I’m surprised their readership isn’t falling even faster than the recently-reported 15-20% over the past year.

    sf (533004)

  26. A quote of Kerry’s non-apology:

    “I sincerely regret that my words were misinterpreted to wrongly imply anything negative about those in uniform, and I personally apologize to any service member, family member, or American who was offended.”

    In what world is that not an apology? Where can I get one of those custom Limbaugh lobotomies that allow you to see the world as you would like and not as it is.

    [I regret that you didn’t understand my post, and I personally apologize to you for your being so clueless. — P]

    Paul (a0f0da)

  27. So who put a bee up your bonnet -P. I was not referring to your post but to comment 26 above. Since your post did not even mention apologies I did not think it would be too hard to get. Sorry you did not understand.

    Paul (a0f0da)

  28. In what world is that not an apology?

    In a world where his words were not misinterpreted, but heard exactly as he spoke them.

    If there is a problem, it is that Kerry misspoke, not the he was misinterpreted. This is the “I’m sorry you’re too stupid to read my mind” apology, which is no apology at all.

    Pablo (08e1e8)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1498 secs.