CARR WRECK: Does the press self-correct?


Part 2—The claim is absurd on its face: Do news orgs correct their own mistakes?

In a wonderful bit of insider clownistry, that’s what David Carr told readers of the New York Times. See THE DAILY HOWLER, 4/23/12.

We know—the claim is absurd on its face. But plainly, that’s what Carr said. The gentleman made his ridiculous claim in his “Media Equation” column:
CARR (4/23/12): What is it with television news and corrections? When the rest of the journalism world gets something wrong, they generally correct themselves. But network news acts as if an on-air admission of error might cause a meteor to land on the noggin of one of its precious talking heads. NBC used all of the powers at its disposal to amend the mistake, except the high-visibility airtime where the bad clip ran in the first place.
According to Carr, TV news programs don’t self-correct. But generally speaking, everybody else does.

This claim is turtles all the way down, as Bertrand Russell once said. Consider a recent pair of mistakes in Carr’s own New York Times. These mistakes concern the killing of Trayvon Martin, the very topic Carr pretended to discuss in yesterday’s column.

One of these mistakes occurred in an editorial on Thursday, April 12. As always, the editors posed themselves under a high-minded headline: “Searching for Justice in Florida.”

But uh-oh! As they proceeded, the editors repeated a widely-made factual error concerning this case. This misstatement has been widely used to drive a certain view of the killing:
NEW YORK TIMES EDITORIAL (4/12/12): Angela Corey, the special prosecutor, declined to discuss details of the case but said that if the Stand Your Ground law is invoked by the defense, ''we will fight it'' with evidence that the shooting was unjustified. In this case, Mr. Zimmerman exited his car to follow the teenager despite a 911 dispatcher's warning: ''We don't need you to do that.''
The highlighted statement is almost certainly false, as the editors should have known or suspected long before April 12. It had long been fairly clear that Zimmerman had already left his car when the dispatcher made the quoted remark. It now seems clear that Corey herself claims that Zimmerman was already out of his car when the dispatcher made this remark.

(This sequence is rather clearly implied in Corey’s affidavit and in the testimony of her lead investigator at last Friday’s bail hearing. To review the relevant testimony, click here, scroll halfway down.)

Almost surely, Zimmerman was already out of his car, following Martin on foot, when the dispatcher made his remark. But on those TV news programs which don’t self-correct, very loud people have endlessly claimed that Zimmerman ignored the dispatcher’s order, instruction or request that he should stay in his car.

This claim has been used to fuel the charge that Zimmerman behaved irresponsibly—against police instructions—in following Martin that night.

By April 12, the editors should have known that this claim was almost certainly false. But so what? The editors followed the lead of the cable screamers and made their inaccurate statement.

Twelve days have passed, and no correction has appeared. Nor will any correction appear; Homey don’t play it that way, and he never has. But writing live and direct from Dreamland, David Carr informed the world that denizens of the “journalism world” do in fact generally self-correct.

That’s pure nonsense. It’s the latest ad for the guild from one of the guild’s own members.

A second misstatement appeared two day later, in Charles Blow’s weekly column. Blow’s statement was less specific than that of the editors—but his claim was also bogus.

Like the editors, Blow posed himself beneath a high-minded headline:
BLOW (4/14/12): Justice for Trayvon

America has heard the calls for justice from a Florida family.

A boy’s blood had been spilled on a rain-soaked patch of grass behind a row of mustard-colored condominiums by a man who had pursued him against the advice of 911 dispatchers. That man carried a 9-millimeter handgun. The boy carried a bag of candy.
Did Zimmerman “pursue [Martin] against the advice of 911 dispatchers?” Like Blow, we don’t know. That is the claim of the prosecution, as is clear from the affidavit charging Zimmerman with second-degree murder and from testimony in last Friday’s bail hearing. But this claim has not been proven. People speaking for Zimmerman have repeatedly said that he began returning to his truck after the dispatcher’s remark.

Blow doesn’t know if his statement is true. In the world Carr has imagined, a correction or a clarification should have appeared by now. But no such statement has appeared—and no such statement will.

The editors made a statement which is almost certainly false; Blow made a statement which is unfounded. But no corrections will appear; Homey don’t play it like that. In fact, the New York Times has created some of the most comical examples of non-correction in the annals of modern press history, a disastrous fact we will review before the week is done.

TV news programs don’t self-correct. But as a general matter, neither does the Times.

Is it possible that Carr doesn’t understand this unfortunate fact—a fact which is blindingly obvious? We can’t get inside people’s heads. But Carr’s highlighted statement—We journalists typically do self-correct—represents the latest staging of a common morality play, in which the guild misleads the public about the guild’s own conduct.

Carr made a ridiculous statement in yesterday’s piece. But he also acted out a familiar drama in this highly familiar column. In his piece, he pretended to dog NBC News about one of the roughly three million mistakes it and its cable affiliates have made in their coverage of the killing of Martin.

Through such presentations, tribunes like Carr give us rubes the impression that the guild is on the job. The Times is watch-dogging NBC News, this newspaper’s readers may think.

When we buy this false impression, we rubes get deceived—again.

Tomorrow: Carr and MSNBC—and also, Brian Stelter

Sometimes, news orgs do self-correct: If their mistakes are sufficiently trivial, big news orgs do self-correct. With regard to the killing of Martin, the New York Times offered this self-correction on April 2:
CORRECTIONS (4/2/12): An article on Thursday about how Skittles, the candy Trayvon Martin was carrying when he was killed, has become a symbol of protest rendered incorrectly the name of a powdered drink that also became a symbol of protest after the cult leader Jim Jones laced it with cyanide to kill more than 900 people in Guyana in 1978. It is Flavor Aid, not Flavor-Aid.
Thank goodness they straightened that out!

As a general rule, big news orgs will correct their own mistakes as long as the mistakes are trivial. When it comes to the killing of Martin, the Times has corrected the spelling of Flavor Aid. But it has failed to inform its readers about those highly-charged claims concerning Zimmerman’s conduct.

Four days later, the clownish newspaper authored another correction:
CORRECTIONS (4/6/12): An article on March 17 about appeals for a Department of Justice investigation into the shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman misstated the time period in which Mr. Zimmerman made 46 calls to 911. The calls were made over the course of about eight years, not over 14 months. The error was repeated in a front-page article on March 21 about Florida's self-defense law known as Stand Your Ground.
It only took the Times three weeks to notice this error. Here at THE HOWLER, we detailed the press corps’ ridiculous bungling of the 46 phone calls on March 27. See THE DAILY HOWLER, 3/27/12.

According to Nexis, the Times has made one other correction concerning the killing of Martin. Blow’s columns have been full of misleading, bogus or unproven statements. But the Times wanted you to know this:
CORRECTIONS (3/28/12): An article on Monday about news coverage of Trayvon Martin, the unarmed 17-year-old who was fatally shot on Feb. 26 in Sanford, Fla., misstated the age of George Zimmerman, the man identified as the shooter. He is 28, not 26.
Our big news orgs do self-correct—when their mistakes don’t matter. In the case of the Times, no one reads these self-corrections, which don't appear in the parts of the paper where the original errors occurred.

This is the very type of conduct against which Carr dramatically railed. NBC News did correct the editing error he cited, one of the roughly three million errors the news org has made in its coverage of the killing of Martin. But they didn't correct it on the Today show itself, our Potemkin watch-dog railed.


  1. Oh sure, it's hugely important whether Zimmerman ignored police advice, but we're supposed to think the non-hyphen in Flavor Aid is simply irrelevant!

    Who can possibly hope to meet Bob's obscure, ever-shifting standards!!??!

  2. Once again, Somerby trolls for combox hits by exploiting the tragedy of Trayvon Martin.

    And he is reduced to parsing the meaning of "pursue" and "warning."

    1. It's hardly a question of parsing, it's one of timing.

      Did it (the warning, instruction, command, suggestion, whatever) happen before Zimmerman left his car?

      That's what Blow says, creating a fact.

      But facts, we know, only matter if we like them.

    2. suggestion...

      Yeah, cause that's how law enforcement works in this country. They just "suggest". Then they invite civilians to take a vote on whether they would like to follow their suggestions. It's all very democratic.

    3. "Did it (the warning, instruction, command, suggestion, whatever) happen before Zimmerman left his car? That's what Blow says, creating a fact."

      No, that's NOT what Blow says. That's what you infer. And of course, like Somerby, you get to read into it anything you want to make your very weak case.

      Because, in the final analysis, what does it matter?

      So you go ahead and lose sleep over what the evil MSNBC hosts and vile NYT columnists are getting wrong, real or imagined.

      I got better things to do.

    4. "pursued him against the advice of 911 dispatchers"

      WHEN did the dispatchers give that advice?

      It would have to have been BEFORE Z pursued M for the statement to have any meaning at all.

      But you don't know if Z pursued M AFTER the time of the dispatcher's statement, do you?

      No, you don't. Neither does Blow, or the NYT editorial board. You go on and get to those better things now.

    5. You would feel differently if it were your freedom at stake due to an unethical prosecution for legally defending yourself resulting from histrionics of race pimps and the rubes who love them.

    6. "But you don't know if Z pursued M AFTER the time of the dispatcher's statement, do you?"

      Ummmm, does the fact that there was supposedly some sort of fight to the death and Martin wound up shot by Zimmerman with Zimmerman's gun tell you anything?

    7. It only tells you something if your IQ is 40 or under.

      There are more plausible explanations such as Zimmerman lost sight of Martin, walked to the end of the sidewalk to the street to get an address as indicated, and attempted to walk back to his vehicle when he was confronted by Martin a few feet from that sidewalk when Martin emerged from the area between rows of town homes.

    8. nomatter_nevermindApril 24, 2012 at 4:01 PM

      There was one dispatcher. He was a police dispatcher, not a 911 dispatcher. The call was a non-emergency police call, not a 911 call.

  3. "Did Zimmerman “pursue [Martin] against the advice of 911 dispatchers?” Like Blow, we don’t know."

    What we do know is Zimmerman invited a citizens watch representative to speak to a group of concerned Sanford citizens.

    During the power point presentation the group was told to not pursue suspicious people but to call in to the police instead. They were told they weren't to pack weapons too.

    Zimmerman, being the head of the group, was well aware of what the guidelines are before he left his vehicle.

    "Zimmerman had made 46 calls to the Sanford police since the start of 2011. Is that fact accurate? We would guess that it is, but we aren’t entirely sure, in part because we follow the work of other American news orgs."

    You don't have to guess.

    The error originated from the wrong dates being typed by the Sanford police.

    They later corrected themselves and stated the time period the calls began was 2011.

    1. See, Blow's mis-statement of the facts is justified by other information.

  4. Bad reporting is having some horrendous consequences.

    Owens was beaten so badly that he is still in intensive care in critical condition:

    Owens’ sister, Ashley Parker, saw the attack. “It was the scariest thing I have ever witnessed.” Parker says 20 people, all African American, attacked her brother on the front porch of his home, using “brass buckles, paint cans and anything they could get their hands on.”

    Police will only say “multiple people” are involved.

    What Parker says happened next could make the fallout from the brutal beating even worse. As the attackers walked away, leaving Owen bleeding on the ground, Parker says one of them said “Now thats justice for Trayvon.


  5. BTW, the fact that Z agreed to stop following M was omitted from any media reports.

    One of the first things presented in the media was a transcript of a conversation between George Zimmerman and a police dispatcher. The last line in most of the transcripts shown on TV was that of the police dispatcher telling Zimmerman not to continue following Trayvon Martin.

    That became the basis of many media criticisms of Zimmerman for continuing to follow him. Only later did I see a transcript of that conversation...that included Zimmerman's reply to the police dispatcher: "O.K."

    That reply removed the only basis for assuming that Zimmerman did in fact continue to follow Trayvon Martin.

    1. typo

      ...was omitted from many media reports.

    2. the fact that Z agreed to stop following M...

      Sorry, that is not an established "fact", like for example it is an established fact that Z shot the youth in the chest with his 9mm handgun.

    3. And the established fact that the man was shot after bashing his victim's head against the sidewalk.

    4. nomatter_nevermindApril 24, 2012 at 1:51 PM

      On the tape, Zimmerman is heard saying 'OK' after the dispatcher says 'OK, we don't need you to do that.'

      A few seconds later his voice returns to normal, after being noticeably breathless after he started running.

    5. First off, you don't know that Zimmerman was ever running. You don't know that he broke off his pursuit of Martin. You don't know how they both wound up where they did.

      In short, you don't know anything, so stop pretending you do.

    6. nomatter_nevermindApril 24, 2012 at 3:58 PM

      That Zimmerman was running is a reasonable inference. He said Martin was running, and then his voice on the tape became noticeably breathless. It was probably in response to this that the dispatcher asked if he was following Martin. After he answered 'OK' to the dispatcher's remark, a few seconds later his voice returned to normal, as would be typical of a person catching his breath after running.

    7. That Zimmerman continued to hunt for Martin with his gun drawn, found him, the kid fought for his life while screaming for help, Zimmerman fell down and bumped his widdle head, then shot the kid is also a "reasonable inference"

      Unfortunately, we all look like fools when we try to "infer" what we don't really know.

    8. nomatter_nevermindApril 24, 2012 at 5:05 PM

      Actually, no, most of those inferences aren't reasonable.

    9. The contortions required to arrive at any likelihood other than self-defense are reminders of how frighteningly stupid some potential jurors are. Casey-Anthony-juror-stupid.

  6. nomatter_nevermindApril 24, 2012 at 1:44 PM

    I appreciate (seriously, no sarcasm) Bob Somerby's work correcting errors regarding the sequence of events in Zimmerman's interaction with the dispatcher.

    Once again I add the further correction, that said dispatcher is a police dispatcher taking a non-emergency call, and not a 911 dispatcher taking a 911 call.

    There are two ways to verify this.

    One is to listen to the dispatcher answer the phone, and compare with how the actual 911 dispatchers do so.

    The other is the call logs. In the heading for each report, after 'Call Source:', you see either '911' or 'TEL'. 'TEL' indicates a non-emergency call.

  7. The Daily Howler is quite correct in noting that Carr's statement is horse hockey on the face of it. It's probably time for EVERYBODY to leave the Martin case for the Courts.

  8. Foг instance, when purсhasing slackѕ for the woгkplace, there are no louvers,
    you vent out business аt thе time. Ѕince I am a shaagird [a pupil].

    Ηerе is my ρage :: internet marketing speed

  9. When looking long term the money saved will be far more than 60, 000 strokes in
    Australia each year and there is a file somewhere that represents your character, he
    adds, which is not good. First, they rely on reading comprehension as game manuals are written as
    well as in many schools around the country. The hi-graphic 3 D Call Of Duty
    Black Ops Free Online Play.

    My blog post :: saw 2 video game

  10. In addition to Jack Thompson, a Florida attorney and activist against violent new metal
    gear game, like Pop-Tarts, are a fairly common thing to find in everyone's home, not just virtual ones. Haunted House- This game features intense blood and violence and the attacks are primal to say the least. 11 For me, there's one thing that people seem to
    need in order to defeat your opponents. What that means is, when you travelled to hell, it was pure fear.

    Double Fine Productions' The Cave is a new and popular mix of an adventure and platform game.

    Here is my web blog ... ign metal gear solid

  11. It is not a romantic love, as far as graphics, plugged
    in the new Video Games Systems, and had Pikachu use a combination of ninja and mask.
    Some Drifloon and Drifblim pass by the balloon.

    These kids video games systems to play inside. Wiggle your
    fingers in front of baby's faceBaby's got ten toes. Greinke took the
    brunt of the blow, breaking his left collarbone and inciting a fight that didn't even end when the game was explained mathematically and a computer solution devised by James D.

    my page; web page