Posted on 07/10/2003 10:04:40 AM PDT by Jean S
Edited on 07/10/2003 10:17:45 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Recently, this web site discovered it has been played as a sucker by a source that was used in seven stories that ran in Capitol Hill Blue from September 2002 until July of 2003.
The person in question was quoted as an unnamed source in six of the seven articles and by name (Terrance J. Wilkinson) in the seventh. We later learned the name was bogus even though I had known (or thought I knew) the person by that name for more than 20 years.
We have turned all our information on this source over to the appropriate law enforcement agencies and, at their instruction, will not discuss the matter publicly until they have concluded their investigations. When those investigations are complete, we will publish a full accounting with every piece of detail that we can produce or uncover about the individual involved. We owe that to our readers.
The six stories that quoted this individual as an unnamed source have been removed from our article database. A search of other news sources through the Internet and on Nexis finds no evidence that any of those six stories were published elsewhere. If a further search uncovers evidence of those stories appearing on any web site or in any publication, we will contact that web site or publication and instruct them to remove the stories.
Some have suggested we should list the stories and keep them on our site with an explanation. Had we found any trace that the stories were reprinted elsewhere, that might have been an option, but our legal counsel advises us that the best course of action is to purge the stories from our database so that any information in them is not picked up and misused elsewhere.
The quotes attributed to the individual by the bogus name have been removed from the story, which ran on Tuesday of this week and we have run multiple searches through the Internet and Nexis to find locations where the story might have been printed. Many had already picked up the retraction we published on Wednesday. Those that had not were contacted and asked to do so. We will continue to monitor the situation and take the necessary corrective steps whenever and wherever we find the story used with the incorrect information.
Journalists have long depended on unnamed sources to break major stories. Without such sources, Watergate, Whitewater and the Monica Lewinsky story might never have come to light.
But we live in a different era now. Technology makes it easier for people to pull together enough information to create a story that sounds credible on the surface but still have hidden agendas underneath.
Many journalists have told me they cannot do their job without unnamed sources. I used to agree with them but events of this past week have caused me to rethink that philosophy.
A line has to be drawn somewhere. Somebody has to stand up and say "I'm not going to be used anymore." We're taking that stand. Effective immediately, Capitol Hill Blue will no longer publish stories that quote unnamed sources. When we do use sources for a story, they will be quoted by name, title and background. That background will be verified before the story is published.
In addition, we are reviewing every story we have run in the past involving unnamed sources and requiring the writers to go back and verify key pieces of information. If we find a problem, we will take any and all action necessary to correct the situation. We will also re-verify the backgrounds of named sources used in articles on sensitive issues.
Does this mean we will miss some major stories? Of course it does. But I'd rather miss a story or two than ever get taken for a ride again.
Related threads:
It is getting better. Check this out [Truthout trying to hide stealing a fraudulent article]
BREAKING: Conned big time "CIA Witness" to White House Lying about Intel story found to be FRAUD
Did Capitol Hill Blue Post An Article With Fabrications?
White House admits Bush wrong about Iraqi nukes
I wonder if someone could find out if the White House was actually contacted by CHB to see if Wilkinson was on the guest list?
I wonder if Doug will identify any of the un-named sources he used to find out he was duped by Wilkinson?
He said in his apology yesterday that.....
" Then a friend from the Hill called.
"You've been had," she said. "I know about this guy. He's been around for years, claiming to have been in Special Forces, with the CIA, with NSA. He hasn't worked for any of them and his name is not Terrance Wilkinson."
Could it be possible to get Doug to let us know who this was that called him, surely she knows his name?
Brilliant. Do we have any legal opinions on this, as to what laws this agent provocateur may have broken and what the practical results of such an investigation might be?
I'm sorry Doug won't post all the relevant articles on a quarantined page, so that freepers could get started on analyzing them. That might say a good deal about exactly what this guy's agenda is, aside from carrying water for the Dark Force and the DNC.
And congratulations again to William McKinley for breaking this scam wide open. I'll bet we'll hear a lot about this scandal (NOT) in the mainstream press.
Seeing as how the guy was getting all kinds of access to official Washington with his tales of Green Beretdom, there's a case to be made for fraud.
Got it. Fascinating story. A buddy of mine was telling me about Bush being caught lying. I'm gonna e-mail him these links as well as a healthy helping of crow.
This gets better and better. So now the non-existent Wilkinson was a source on six non-existent stories. What a massive, steaming crock Thompson is trying to feed us!
That's good. I wonder what name he'll make up next, now that "Terrance J. Wilkinson" is past its expiration date.
Hey Doug, try "Anita Newjob."
I'm sooooo tired of reading liberal papers that quote an unnamed Republican who is "oh so ready" to trash other Republicans. I seriously doubt most liberal reporters are close trusting friends with the Republicans they love to trash.
Ever notice how all the "mistakes and lies" type press scandals are written about conservatives or groups aligned with conservatives? The other press lie category is hyping a liberal cause and victim group to make them look more needy and pathetic. ( Burning churches - 8 year old heroin addicts).
Has anyone seen a false story that trashed a liberal? Or made a liberal group look bad?
I suspect, like the Nazi press, they're careful when reporting about fellow liberals (Nazis), but not to careful when reporting about conservatives (Jews). Double standard?
I'm sooooo tired of reading liberal papers that quote an unnamed Republican who is "oh so ready" to trash other Republicans. I seriously doubt most liberal reporters are close trusting friends with the Republicans they love to trash.
Ever notice how all the "mistakes and lies" type press scandals are written about conservatives or groups aligned with conservatives? The other press lie category is hyping a liberal cause and victim group to make them look more needy and pathetic. ( Burning churches - 8 year old heroin addicts).
Has anyone seen a false story that trashed a liberal? Or made a liberal group look bad?
I suspect, like the Nazi press, they're careful when reporting about fellow liberals (Nazis), but not to careful when reporting about conservatives (Jews). Double standard?
Aren't they all safely tucked way in FR's archives, to be brought forth when needed?
More power to ya. Here's to hoping the NYT follows your lead.
I would still like to have the name of the articles that were changed because of the link to Wilkinson.
I would like FR to get a chance to search and see how many articles may have been picked up by other groups.
Scroll down on the left side of the page look for a search box in light blue....type in Doug Thompson and it will show all of his archived articles.
Gee, what a bold sacrifice he makes on behalf of his readers for the cause of journalistic integrity.
Thompson wasn't taken for a ride. It's him who's behind the wheel taking his readers for a ride with a story that's an obvious author fabrication.
Thompson's blameshifiting, his claims of being a victim, or being unable to speak further on the matter on the advice of counsel, his inability to produce a single shred of evidence to corroborate the existence of his now-you-see-him-now-you-don't spook source (much less his other unnamed sources from the White House and CIA who miraculously appear to point the finger of blame away from Thompson)--it all rings hollow.
It adds up to a writer who's been busted and is now furiously backpeddling with self-serving actions and statements in a futile attempt to worm out of responsibility for what he's done.
I believe that Thompson has been caught lying. But even if every word of his mea culpa is true, then he's still guilty of journalistic negligence so gross as to render him useless as a credible news source in the future.
Considering that most of us post here using the anonimity of screen names, no mention of FR would be consistant with CHB's new policy.
Kudos to William McKinley, but IMHO, he's still an "anonymous" source.
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.