The New Math of the NYT education columnist Richard Rothstein: 2 + 1 = "2" (and not "3")

The NYT ^ | June 20, 2002; June 19, 2002 | summer; Richard Rothstein

[summer]

And, to top it off, despite the factual errors and false representations I pointed out on June 19th, re: this June 18th NYT column, now, today, June 21st, a Dem web site posts a link to this bogus article by Richard Rothstein:

"Voucher Program Flunks Special Ed 6/21"

It's as if that Dem web site's operators said:

Hmmm...we won't post the factually inaccurate NYT article on 6/18, the day we first saw it. Nor will we link to it on 6/19, when summer posted that FR editorial debunking it. Nor on 6/20, when FR posters were posting on summer's column.

However, as for today, "6/21" -- well, now, today seems like a great day to post the link to this bogus NYT column.

That kind of thinking on their part does not impress me at all. Not at all.

[summer]

Minor correction on the date I posted: June 20th. Not 19th.

But, this NYT article did get published in the NYT on June 18th.

Now, three days later, the Dem site decides it is worth linking to. Even though the article is grossly inaccurate.

[summer]

LOL...now my head is spinning! June 19th the NYT published, June 20th I wrote. And, two days later from June 19th -- the Dem web site is out with the link, today, June 21st. OK, I still have a valid point here! Because the article is still WRONG!@#$ And, they still waited!

[summer]

You know, it would be a whole new world if more people corrected minor errors as quickly as I try to do so. And, made some effort, at some point, to correct the BIG mistakes. I hope Gov. Bush writes to the NYT or pens an Op-Ed column for them about this Rothstein column. NYT readers will read it if Gov Bush's writes it.

[summer]

...if Gov Bush writes it....

[summer]

OK. I'm finally done here! :)

[Clemenza]

Bump! Great Read!

(Sorry for the late bump, as I was on vacation).

[summer]

Thanks, Clemenza! Hope you had a great vacation! :)

[Dog Gone]

LOL, this is the definition of a "lambasting"! Excellent essay, and a great job of pointing out the liberal media bias.

I hope that your rebuttal makes it out from this forum into the mainstream media. We shall see.

[summer]

My rebuttal probably will make it into the "circular file" AKA garbage can, of the NYT. But, I appreciate your post here, Dog Gone. :)

[Gumlegs]

"SmarterTimes" used to be a favorite website. Unfortunately, with the advent of the New York Sun, they no longer update the website daily. So I read the Sun.

[summer]

Thanks for your post, Gumlegs.

BTW, I haven't seen any corrections about Rothstein's column, but I did see a slew of other corrections, below.

From today's NYT

June 21, 2002

Corrections

An article on Wednesday about Israel's decision to seize Palestinian land after 19 people died in a suicide bombing misstated the ranking of the episode among deadly attacks. It was the third deadliest bombing since September 2000, not the second. (The worst killed 29 people at a hotel in Netanya on March 27; the second worst was on June 1, 2001, at a Tel Aviv disco, where 21 died.)

o The Mexico City Journal article on Tuesday, about the blow to national pride when Mexico's soccer team lost to the United States in the World Cup, misstated the year the country gained its independence from Spain, an event commemorated by the Angel of Independence statue, where Mexicans often gather to celebrate victories. It was 1821, not 1812.

o Because of an editing error, a front-page article on Tuesday about a United States Forest Service employee who has been charged with setting a fire that has burned more than 100,000 acres of Colorado misidentified the agency that inadvertently caused a wildfire outside Los Alamos, N.M., in 2000. It was the National Park Service, not the forest service.

o An article yesterday about security changes at Logan International Airport in Boston referred incorrectly to the ownership of two jets from there that were hijacked on Sept. 11. Only one belonged to American Airlines; the other belonged to United.

o A front-page article yesterday about a federal lawsuit alleging racial discrimination by the New York City Parks and Recreation Department misstated the position of Robert Wright, a black employee named in the suit as a victim of discrimination. He is the parks and recreation manager responsible for District 11 in Harlem, which includes parks, playgrounds and a recreation center - not just the manager of a recreation center.

An article in Business Day on Wednesday about efforts by Martha Stewart to resolve questions about her sale of shares of ImClone Systems last December misstated the timing of the addition of a lawyer, James F. Fitzpatrick, to her team. He was brought in by Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz earlier this month to assist with a Congressional inquiry. He was not hired on Tuesday.

o An article in Business Day on Wednesday about plans by the jury foreman in the Arthur Andersen trial to write a book about the case - and about the doubtful sales history of such books - misstated the profession of an earlier author-juror, Hazel Thornton, who wrote about the first murder trial of Erik and Lyle Menendez, which ended in 1994. Ms. Thornton is an engineer, not a psychologist.

o An obituary of the American composer Ralph Shapey on Saturday misidentified a teacher with whom one of his own teachers - Stefan Wolpe - studied. Wolpe's teacher was Anton Webern, not Arnold Schoenberg. (Webern, in turn, studied with Schoenberg.)

o The Weekender column in Escapes last Friday, about the town of Ocean Grove, N.J., misstated the surname of the owner of the Ocean Vista Hotel. She is Diane Herr, not Kerr. The article also included a musical group incorrectly among those scheduled for the Great Auditorium in Ocean Grove this season. Peter, Paul and Mary are not scheduled.

The Times welcomes comments and suggestions, as well as information about errors that call for correction. Messages may be e-mailed to nytnews@nytimes.com or left at this toll-free number: 1-888-NYT-NEWS (1-888-698-6397). For comments on an editorial: letters@nytimes.com (by fax, 212-556-3622). For newspaper delivery questions: 1-800-NYTIMES (1-800-698-4637).

[summer]

From Education Week's news clippings page:

A Voucher Program Flunks Special Ed From The New York Times (requires free registration): June 19. Florida has two school voucher programs. One, small but widely publicized, pays private tuition for students who abandon public schools that have low test scores. Students from 10 Florida schools, all in low-income areas, can get vouchers next year; experience suggests that few will use them.

[LarryLied]

The Supreme Court ruling on vouchers will be out any day now. Watch the sparks fly no matter how it is decided.

[summer]

Yes, I'm sure sparks will fly on that decision!

[summer]

Thank you again for posting on this thread.

I learned something here, and what I learned raised a new question. I'd like to share it with you, so that you might comment with feedback, if you are so inclined.

Here's the question:

Do you perceive Richard Rothstein, the author of this piece, to be either (A) or (B) below?:

(A) Richard Rothstein is a journalist, who attempts to write a continuing factual series about education.

OR:

(B) Richard Rothstein is an editorial writer, who attempts to write a continuing editorial series about education.

The reason I ask is because I spent time reading information on the web site Media Research Center, whose objective to uncover liberal bias in the media. (And, a poster on FR sent them my post here for their analysis.)

Their guidelines on identifying media bias state that bias can exist in a news story -- but, no bias exists if the writer wrote an editorial.

Consequently, what do you think Richard Rothstein attempt to write here? A news story? Or, an editorial?

Because: If you believe Rothstein is (A) above, a journalist, then, it follows that:

(1) bias by omission certainly exists in this piece; and

(2) LarryLied's comment on the thread was on target - as LarryLied said Rothstein's editor should chew out Rothstein.

However, if you believe Rothstein is (B) above, an editorial writer, then, it follows that:

(1) no bias exists because in an editorial Rothstein can say whatever he wants; and

(2) PJ-Comix's comment on the thread is more on target - as PJ-Comix said the NYT should be running another column presenting an opposing viewpoint (since presenting a viewpoint, not fact, is what the NYT does by publishing Rothstein).

Before you decide which Rothstein is - a journalist who allegedly writes facts; or an editorial writer writing editorials, consider my viewpoint as a teacher:

In the educational establishment -- and, in the eyes of many teachers -- what Rothstein writes is FACT because of the following reasons:

Reason #1 -- "LESSONS" is the title of his column.

As a teacher, when I teach a LESSON, I am teaching about FACT. So, when I look at Rothstein's "LESSONS" column through my teacher's eyes, I expect to read: FACT - not opinion.

Reason #2 - Proof that the way I see Rothstein is the way others in education see Rothstein can be found on the Education Week web site, which summarizes the "Best of the Week" from newspapers all over the world.

If Education Week summarizes an article which is "OPINION" then: Education Week includes the word "OPINION" after the title of the article. But, if it is a news story, then, the word "OPINION" is not found after the title. In all of Rothstein's "LESSONS" articles picked up and summarized on Education Week, there is NEVER the word "OPINION." (See my post #133 on this thread and the link.)

Thus, my individual belief as a teacher that Rothstein writes fact is reinforced by Education Week, as they too tell me he writes FACT in his "LESSONS" column.

Finally, consider the following as well:

IF you, as a conservative, scream at the NYT that:

(A) Richard Rothstein is a biased journalist, then, the NYT can reply: "NO, you idiot conservative. Rothstein's LESSONS column is (B) -- the work of an editorial writer. Thus, Rothstein can say whatever he wants."

- OR, your complaint to the NYT is instead:

(B) Richard Rothstein is an editorial writer, and the NYT fails to present an opposing view, then, the NYT can reply: "No, you idiot conservative. The NYT constantly published OP-ED pieces from conservatives who write about education. "(And, it's true. Many conservatives write "OP-ED" pieces on education published in the NYT.)

And, this fact -- (And, it's true. Many conservatives write "OP-ED" pieces on education published in the NYT.) leads to my complaint-speaking now as a teacher who suddenly recognizes how the NYT has been getting away with its BIAS for years on end in terms of education:

In the biased world of the NYT, if the writer of an education piece is expressing what one would call a "conservative" view, then, the NYT deems that writing to be opinion, and clearly labeled: OP- ED. (OPINION)

Consequently, no conservative "opinions" ever appear in a column titled: "LESSONS" (FACT). That LESSONS-FACT-"TRUTH" column is reserved for the liberal view ONLY, as expressed by Mr. Rothstein.

In short, this seems like: BIAS BY PLACEMENT.

For, if you are a conservative writing about education, the NYT will only tell teachers that you have what is called: AN OPINION. ("OP-ED" is the title of YOUR piece in the NYT).

But, if you are the liberal Richard Rothstein writing about education, then, the NYT, and Education Week, will tell teachers that what they are reading now is called: FACT ("LESSONS" is the title in the NYT, and no word "opinion" will ever appear next to that piece when picked up by Education Week).

Now, in a balanced newspaper of real journalism, here is what would happen -- either a new column starts appearing in the NYT next to Rothstein's:



NYT - "LESSONS" BY [LIBERAL] RICHARD ROTHSTEIN

as published alongside his would be another column, the same day, and such column is NOT called "op ed" anymore, but instead titled:

NYT - "LESSONS" BY [GUEST CONSERVATIVE WRITER, WHOEVER]

(both columns appear SIDE BY SIDE.)

AND, both are LABELED: "OPINION" by EDUCATION WEEK.

OR: If no new column, then, not only does his editor chew him out, but Richard Rothstein gets fired for his unprofessional reporting.

However, the NYT will never do EITHER ONE OF THESE REMEDIES. It's a racket they've got going - like a two-mirror.

For what the NYT claims Richard Rothstein is - (A) journalist or (B) editorial writer -- all depends on who is asking the question. The answer the NYT will give is different for: (A) a liberal teacher; and (B) a conservative reader.

Did I make any sense here?

[summer]

two-mirror. = two-way mirror.

[summer]

FYI: My post here was sent by a FR poster to the Media Research Center for analysis of potential liberal bias in the media. If you have a moment, please take the time to read post #136 and share your thoughts. Thanks.

[summer]

FYI: My post here was sent by an FR poster to the Media Research Center for an analysis of potential bias in the news media. If you have a moment, please read post #136 and share your thoughts. Thanks!

[summer]

FYI: My post here was sent by an FR poster to the Media Research Center, for analysis of potential bias in the news media. If you have time, please read post #136 and share your thoughts. Thanks!