Newsweek issues correction on Palin social issues story

WThrockmorton.com ^ | 9/16/08 | staff

[pissant]

Katie Paul at Newsweek alerted me that Newsweek printed a correction to their story claiming that Palin cut funding for teen mothers and the state WIC program. I blogged about it here and had extensive conversations with Alaska officials about the claims. Ms. Paul was also diligent to work with Alaska officials to correct the story once I made her aware of the facts.

Here is the correction (at the end of page 2):

Clarification (updated Sept. 11, 2008) : A number of readers have challenged the assertion in this story that Gov. Palin “cut by 20 percent the funding for Covenant House Alaska, a state-supported program that includes a transitional home where new teenage mothers can spend up to 18 months learning money management and parenting skills.” In fact, she did not cut existing funding, but rather trimmed by $1.1 million funds the Alaska legislature had allocated for Covenant House Alaska this year for a capital construction project. We have also clarified the original wording which implied that Palin had voided the entire Women, Infants, Children (WIC) program. This was not our intent; Palin voided $15,840 the legislature had allocated for a WIC provider.

Now when is the Washington Post going to correct the Sept 2 story that started the teen mom claim?

[pissant]

These dumb bastards have a whole lotta correcting to do.

[FlingWingFlyer]

They know that “corrections” don’t mean a whole lot after the damage is done.

[olezip]

Katie Paul at Newsweek alerted me that Newsweek printed a correction to their story claiming that Palin cut funding for teen mothers and the state WIC program. I blogged about it here and had extensive conversations with Alaska officials about the claims. Ms. Paul was also diligent to work with Alaska officials to correct the story once I made her aware of the facts.

Once the damage is done, the corrections are practically meaningless. Newsweek is part of the liberal biased MSM, and practically worthless IMO. I have not read it for years; even when I on occasion take a look at Newsweek, I soon return it to the coffee table because I find it repulsive.

[Fester Chugabrew]

. . . don’t mean a whole lot after the damage is done.

That's why they're called "drive by media."

[Tzimisce]

We’re sorry that Sarah Palin is a b*tch…...

[justkate]

I think I saw it posted under the Classified Ad section of yesterday’s paper.

Look for an ad that starts:For sale, 1999 Ford Tuarus, 4 door. Newer brakes, CORRECTION:Palin Cuts to Social Program
Not as Drastic as Reported, 147,667 miles. Great car for
short distances.”

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Newsweek shouldn’t bother correcting previous errors. They’re not the publication of record in any measure and will likely be out of business within 20 months.

[healy61]

Newsqueek gets it wrong? From their typewriters to no one’s ears. Hard to believe they still use selectrics. LOL

[muawiyah]

Newsweek is owned by the same folks who own the Washington Post.

[VanDeKoik]

They could release a Special Issue of nothing but corrections.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

The very act of publishing a correction indicates an inflated self opinion. Nobody cares if they're right or wrong.
I'll bet $10 the magazine is out of business in less than 2-3 years and the W Post will be not too far behind them.

[mlocher]

I'll bet $10 the magazine is out of business in less than 2-3 years and the W Post will be not too far behind them.

One can certainly hope they will be. But given the government's current rate of bailing out businesses, it would not surprise me to see a Newsweek bailout when things get tough.

[kempo]

I thumb through one at the doctor's office and it reminded me of why I canceled my subscription back in the 80’s.

[DemforBush]

That’s kind of my thought. The mud can’t be un-slung, and Newsweek knows it.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

A bailout of publishing/news gathering companies had occurred to me as a possibility, what with all the big newspapers falling flat and laying off. Fortunately, the news business (as presently defined) doesn't seem critical to the welfare of the American people. I suspect we'll eventually have four or five national newspapers with regional editions, more or less like the WSJ. This will be funded by stockholders, not government, which is as it should be. I wish them good luck.
Little neighborhood and small town newspapers will continue to do OK, merged, but OK.

[mlocher]

I suspect we'll eventually have four or five national newspapers with regional editions, more or less like the WSJ

Your observation is very astute. This is in line with the rule of 3, as defined by Prahalad. (Rule of 3 is that in any industry, there will be 3 "big" players and several niche players. Just the natural evolution of markets.) This rule works well and promotes efficiency. It cannot be gotten around by government intervention (e.g. Chrysler in the late 1970s). Government intervention merely delays the inevitable.

[Sigurdrifta]

I canceled my subscription after the “Koran in a toilet” farce (and the resultant deaths in the Muslim riots).

Haven’t missed it one bit.

[My Favorite Headache]

Will those scumbags from Newsweak be on Olbermann’s show with this retraction? He spent 20 mins on this story one night bashing her.

[Wuli]

If Newsspeak was staffed by actual “journalists” and was managed by people who cared enough to be true and objective “journalists”, the “error” would never have happened and no apology would have been needed.

Newsspeak is not in the business of journalism.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I suspect there are sufficient printing plants around to run various editions of newspapers for the next 20 years. WSJ really led in this endeavor.
When Des Moines, for example, can no longer support the Des Moines Register, it might publish a big regional newspaper that has yet to be named. It will be mailed, rather than carried by paper boys, and eventually go completely on-line. This step toward non newsprint news will actually provide more jobs in the industry.