NY Times Admit Reporter Deceived Them
from the who-needs-fact-checkers-any-more? dept
It seems that in the webified age of "publish now!" fact checkers no longer exist - even at "distinguished" newspapers like the NY Times. The Times came out with a huge confession admitting (as was rumored in recent weeks) that one of their reporters completely made up parts of certain articles. He apparently lied about where he was (pretending to report from the scene, when really he was home in NY), he falsified quotes, he plagiarized stories, and pretended to know what was going on from news wire pictures. The NY Times, itself, seems to be in shock. What stuns me is that a simple fact checking should have uncovered many of these falsehoods - but apparently they never occurred. They admit in the article that the reporters, themselves, are often the only fact checkers the NY Times uses. The NY Times is still trying to track down all the lies from this guy, and are even asking readers to help them track down his falsehoods. What's also stunning is that some of those at the NY Times who worked with this guy had suggested the paper get rid of him - pointing out problems with his writing, saying that there were often "errors". There are a ton of news organizations picking up on this story. Poynter has an interesting article talking about whether or not this sort of thing could easily occur elsewhere - which turns out to be more about how it actually happened in the first place. What's most amazing to me is the sheer number of mistakes this guy made, and the amount of time it took for him to get caught.