Skip to comments.Reporter violated NYT ethics code with false Fast and Furious story
Posted on 06/06/2012 6:55:36 PM PDT by marktwain
Charlie Savage, a reporter for The New York Times, violated the newspapers own code of ethics by printing a false story about the ongoing congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furious on Tuesday evening.
For the Times, Savage reported late on Tuesday that House Speaker John Boehner had opened direct negotiations with the Department of Justice aimed at resolving a dispute over subpoenaed information related to the botched gun-trafficking investigation dubbed Operation Fast and Furious. The story ran under the headline Boehner in talks with Justice Dept. on gun-running inquiry, implying that the speaker was directly participating in talks.
Boehner spokesman Michael Steel, however, said the report was not true, and in a blog post attacking the Times, Boehners office wrote that neither the newspaper nor Savage reached out to Boehners team before publishing the story.
Savage has since updated the post, as opposed to issuing a correction for the implication that Boehner was directly negotiating with the Justice Department.
After I received his [Steels] email, I updated the blog post to include his characterization of the talks, Savage said in comments to Politico. As part of the update I also made clearer that these are staff-level discussions. The original version, including its headline, had said Boehner was engaged in direct talks, by which I meant that the speakers office is talking directly to DOJ rather than routing the conversation exclusively through Issas shop as before, not that Boehner himself is personally negotiating.
Section 20 of The New York Times Companys publicly printed policy for Ethics in Journalism states that anyone [staff members or outside contributors] who knowingly or recklessly provides false information to the Times for publication betray our fundamental pact with our public.
Savage admitted that he failed to seek comment from Boehners team in a comment to Politico, which resulted in the incorrect report. He [Steel] was right that I should have reached out to them, Savage said.
While its unclear whether Savage knew the information he provided to the Times was false as alleged by Boehners office and confirmed by Savages own post-publication admission his failure to verify his report with Boehners office ahead of time stands out as reckless under the Times ethics policy. Savage has not responded to The Daily Callers repeated requests for comment on the issue.
The Times ethics code says the publication takes these violations seriously. We will not tolerate such behavior, reads the policy.
Its unclear if the Times intends to hold Savage accountable for the report. Times spokeswoman Danielle Rhoades-Ha has not responded to TheDCs repeated requests for comment.
The original story was posted at 6:51 p.m. on Tuesday, according to a time stamp on the Times website. The Times edited the story after publication, removing the statement Boehners office said was false and changing the focus of the article, while adding a quote from Boehners spokesman. The Times also changed the articles headline.
The way this was executed may be another violation of The New York Times ethics code. In Section 17 of the Times journalistic ethics policy, the publication says that it correct[s] our errors explicitly as soon as we become aware of them.
We do not wait for someone to request a correction, the ethics code reads. We publish corrections in a prominent and consistent location or broadcast time slot.
Savages story was not edited until after Boehners office publicly pressed him on its inaccuracies. Boehners office published a blog post pointing out his false reporting at least an hour and a half before Savage updated the piece. Also, the speakers office said theyd sent Savage a statement about the inaccuracies after seeing the story online.
The online version of the article contains no correction or explanation as to why Savages story was edited after the fact. A note does tell readers the article was updated at 11:39 p.m., but doesnt say why.
The timing and nature of the update shows the Times de facto correction was neither explicit nor published until after a request for correction was received and broadcast online by the speakers office. The Times spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment on whether this too constituted an ethics policy violation.
The Times has ethics? Who knew?
Gunwalker / Murdergate ping.
False story for the MSM is when someone accidentally commits journalism and tells the truth..
HaaHaaHaaHaa.......the New York Times has a code of ethics....good one.
That should be the real story.
Apparently, "All the news that's fit to print" is an evolving paradigm.
Joseph Goebbles would be proud of the American “news” media.
The guts of the story scares me. Why is Boehner going around Issa ? oh, excuse me...why is Boehner’s STAFF going around Issa ?
“The guts of the story scares me. Why is Boehner going around Issa ? oh, excuse me...why is Boehners STAFF going around Issa ?”
Therein lies yhe REAL question. Why indeed?
That was my EXACT same rection, just seeing the headline
The answer is really simple. Boehner wants this to go away and Issa is coming out with a steady drip of public releases to force him not to. By himself, it is obvious that Issa cannot force the major player to bring Holder down, but he refuses to let this go away.
Which part of this “story” is the real propaganda? The part that names boehner? The part where the daily caller tries to exonerate boehner? Or the part that is corrected to name boehner’s staff?
Would boehner’s staff be “negotiating “ with the doj without his direct knowledge? How many betrayals are we willing to overlook?
I suspect their definition of 'error' is different than ours... We mean bias - information as coin of the realm - sources that come from only one side or one desk over... Stories that aren't covered for PC reasons... others that are - but always benefiting liberals. Errors of deep significance.
What they probably mean is, 'we said he would arrive at 3 pm - rather than 4 pm...' - something meaningless.
Guess that's the downside of getting all the 'tips' from one side...
Issa should be the next Speaker of the House....the Tan Man should stick to golf.....time for a new Speaker....
Nothing to see here. Just our “free” press running a coverup story for the criminal 0bama administration.
I wouldn’t bet a grain of salt that anything the NYTs or Charlie Savage is saying is true.