It's already found it's place at every Starbucks in the country. That should tell you something right there.
Posted on 03/23/2006 8:14:51 AM PST by LM_Guy
NEW YORK For the second time in less than a week, The New York Times today admitted to a serious error in a story. On Saturday it said it had misidentified a man featured in the iconic "hooded inmate" photograph from Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Today it discloses that a woman it profiled on March 8 is not, in fact, a victim of Hurricane Katrina--and was arrested for fraud and grand larceny yesterday.
As it did in the Abu Ghraib mistake, the Times ran an editors' note on page 2 of its front section, along with a lengthy news article (this time on the front page of Section B). Again mirroring the Abu Ghraib episode, the newspaper revealed a surprising and inexplicable lapse in fact-checking on the part of a reporter and/or editor.
The original article, more than 1000 words in length, was written by Nicholas Confessore. He also wrote the news article about the error today. Without saying that he wrote the first story, he wrote today: "The Times did not verify many aspects of Ms. Fenton's claims, never interviewed her children, and did not confirm the identity of the man she described as her husband."
The editors' note states:
"An article in The Metro Section on March 8 profiled Donna Fenton, identifying her as a 37-year-old victim of Hurricane Katrina who had fled Biloxi, Miss., and who was frustrated in efforts to get federal aid as she and her children remained as emergency residents of a hotel in Queens.
"Yesterday, the New York police arrested Ms. Fenton, charging her with several counts of welfare fraud and grand larceny. Prosecutors in Brooklyn say she was not a Katrina victim, never lived in Biloxi and had improperly received thousands of dollars in government aid. Ms. Fenton has pleaded not guilty.
"For its profile, The Times did not conduct adequate interviews or public record checks to verify Ms. Fenton's account, including her claim that she had lived in Biloxi. Such checks would have uncovered a fraud conviction and raised serious questions about the truthfulness of her account."
Last Saturday, the Times editors' note disclosed that Ali Shalal Qaissi, pictured on the front page "as the hooded man forced to stand on a box, attached to wires, in a photograph from the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal of 2003 and 2004," was not that man. "The Times did not adequately research Mr. Qaissi's insistence that he was the man in the photograph," it related.
later read
If the story fits their agenda they do not care about the truth.
The antique media are in serious trouble. They want subscriptions for less and less money, plus added incentives.
The New York Times will soon find its rightful place next to the other tabloids at the supermarket checkout.
Haven't you heard? It's the paper of record!
Nicholas Confessore is also a devout
liberal who joined the NYT staff not
too long ago.
http://www.timeswatch.org/twarticles/2005/printer_20050117.asp
In all seriousness, anyone who reads anything from the MSM needs to first truly understand that what he is reading is NOT the real story. It may actually be a story, but it is NOT the whole truth or even anything close.
Slimed again by the NY Slimes...
What about a her getting a JOB? or is her only ability to produce offspring.
Katrina "victims" and Katrina "survivors"
What a bunch of crap!
I can't read any article that describes anyone in this manner.
Given four days notice you can "survive" nearly anything.
Why are we complaining? They'll catch all the welfare cheats by printing their stories on the front page.
It fits the agenda, why bother checking the facts? Even if unproven, the gist of the story is still true: America = bad.
The NY Slimes is incapable of real journalism and reporting.
This prime example of another fabricated lie to hurt GW is going down into the NY Slimes fecal pile of lies, spins and gay fairy tales to hurt our president.
Would anyone believe their circulation numbers?
The NY Slimes Corporate Culture is based on lies, pushing the homosexual agenda, attacking Christians, Israel and of GW.
"Haven't you heard? It's the paper of record!"
I think it is the paper with a record, and it is not a good one.
It's already found it's place at every Starbucks in the country. That should tell you something right there.
Just think about how many such fraudulent stories have been foisted upon the public through the years. Even now, when they know they are under more scrutiny than before, they continue to churn out such flagrantly bogus articles. They are INCORRIGIBLE.
...newspaper revealed a surprising and inexplicable lapse in fact-checking...
^^
We're the New York Times. We don't need no steenkin' facts!
The book by Peter Brock, is called:
Media Cleansing: Dirty Reporting, Journalism and Tragedy in Yugoslavia
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1601184/posts?page=45#45
BTTT
BTTT
LOL!! You are so right!!
When your hiring policy is first and foremost, only liberals apply--you'll not get the truth. Chuckle, chuckle. At its base liberalism is a lie. Hire one and you get what you hire.
The NYT bathhouse boys are run by the NOW gang editorial board.
Sick freaks.
I hope the authorities consider the possibility that the reporter was part of the scam.
   |
The New York Times is STILL the 'paper of record' with the blue-blood elites of New England. Whenever I see some wealthy Democrat snob in Vermont buying a copy, I snicker at them. They get pretty huffy.
Great!
I believe the NYTimes reported that Saddam has claimed that he was a victim of Katrina at his trial. /sarcasm
SSDD@NYT.
"Just think about how many such fraudulent stories have been foisted upon the public through the years. Even now, when they know they are under more scrutiny than before, they continue to churn out such flagrantly bogus articles. They are INCORRIGIBLE."
Exactly!
These lying sobs have lied and falsified data and stories for decades.
They are so arrogant, as you noted, they still try today. Inspite of often being shown as liars again before their ink is dry on their lies posing as news.
Lying is the Corporate Culture of the major fishwraps in America. Does anyone believe that they are not Enroning/Cooking their books re subscriptions and other data to charge more for advertising?
Don't tell that to the libbies who still think it is some kind of sign of intellectual superiority to read the NY Slimes. I know several, and believe me, they still think the Slimes is the be-all and end-all of journalism (along with PBS and NPR, naturally), and that they are oh-so-intelligent and enlightened for reading that rag.
Suckers!
Much of the survival aspect in Mississppi at least is recovery of homes, jobs, schools etc. Its a very large rebuild. Most who experienced Katrina continue a significant struggle without whining. I understand your point about victim status- but you cant rebuild ~ 50,000 homes with 4 days notice.
It's such a huge daily paper, it is bound to happen. When called to their attention, they do publish errata. But not on the 1909 article :-)
I'm not excusing it, just saying that's the way it is. Can you imagine all the extra time it would take to check public records before publishing a story? Some can't be found, some aren't released to anyone but a close relative, some are only released to descendants, some not at all, sometimes you have to go there in person, each county is different.
I don't want to unjustly accuse the Times of anything, but when it's a good story that might fit their agenda, they can print it and so few people read who know the real story/individual that many similar errors have probably never been caught. It's not like your hometown newspaper where more people know the names and facts.
Some stories are too good to check. If they checked this woman out and it turned out her story was fraudulent, they would not have had a hammer to back the President with. The only surefire way to prevent this is to not check the story, and print whatever lies anybody might feed you, as long as it supports your agenda.
Meanwhile the documentary evidence coming out of Iraq showing an Iraqi connection to 9/11 "may have limited evidentiary value"...
"paper of redactions"...
Surprise, surprise, surprise....
Rush is talking about this now.
Have you ever noticed that every time you have direct personal knowledge of a newsworthy event, when you read the story in the newspaper the next day, they have just about everything wrong? This happens over and over again. Talk to anybody who has been the subject of a newspaper story, and they'll tell you the same thing.
And yet, those same people will pick up the New York Times the next day and believe every word.
It happens on FreeRepublic all the time. Freepers, of all people, should be well aware that the media is almost completely untrustworthy. Yet, several times a day (hour!?!) Freepers kneejerk themselves into hysteria based on the latest lies published by the AP, CBSnews, or the NYT's. It's like Charlie Brown and Lucy. How many times do you have to get the football yanked from in front of you before you stop falling for the same old crap.
That's because the only thing the NY Times cared about was the fact that she was bashing the Bush Administration.
BTW when is this incompetent reporter going to be fired?
Good photo, but we really need one of BURNT toast..... charred, ugly burnt toast...... that is the MSM.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.