New York Times: If ACORN Says Something and It Turns Out to Be False, We Just Won’t Report That. Because, You Know, Otherwise, They Might Look Like Liars!
Tom Maguire notes this riotously funny passage from New York Times ombudsman Clark Hoyt:
The Times quoted a statement by Bertha Lewis, Acorn’s chief executive, saying that the two activists, James O’Keefe, 25, and Hannah Giles, 20, spent months visiting Acorn offices in San Diego, Los Angeles, Miami and Philadelphia before getting the responses they wanted. But the article left out one city Lewis cited: New York [link]. Between the time of her statement and the publication of the article, a new video surfaced, featuring an Acorn worker in Brooklyn advising Giles to bury money from prostitution in a tin.
Some readers saw a deliberate effort by the paper to help Lewis out of a tight spot. Scott Shane, the reporter, said he had been unable to reach Lewis and felt that including New York among the cities she mentioned would have implied unfairly that she was lying, something for which he had no evidence. He said he thought it was unlikely that employees in New York would inform her of their misconduct before the video appeared. I think he should have included New York.
Uh, so do I.
So, to recap: ACORN spokeswoman says O’Keefe and Giles went to San Diego, Miami, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, and New York — and got nowhere. But then, the New York Times finds out that they did go to New York, and got somewhere. They decide that including ACORN spokewoman’s full quote might make her look like a liar. So they doctor her quote to make sure she doesn’t look like a liar.
And if Breitbart had revealed an ACORN video from Los Angeles, would the New York Times have omitted that too?
Because: how do they know that he doesn’t have a video from Los Angeles?
It’s an innocent question.