...she ain't as aware of her surroundings as she used to be.
On July 17, the New York Times published a piece, "Cronkite's Signature: Approachable Authority" on the public life of Walter Cronkite. Five days later numerous changes were made -- a virtual rewrite -- with this notice given underneath:
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
An appraisal on Saturday about Walter Cronkite’s career included a number of errors. In some copies, it misstated the date that the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was killed and referred incorrectly to Mr. Cronkite’s coverage of D-Day. Dr. King was killed on April 4, 1968, not April 30. Mr. Cronkite covered the D-Day landing from a warplane; he did not storm the beaches. In addition, Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon on July 20, 1969, not July 26. “The CBS Evening News” overtook “The Huntley-Brinkley Report” on NBC in the ratings during the 1967-68 television season, not after Chet Huntley retired in 1970. A communications satellite used to relay correspondents’ reports from around the world was Telstar, not Telestar. Howard K. Smith was not one of the CBS correspondents Mr. Cronkite would turn to for reports from the field after he became anchor of “The CBS Evening News” in 1962; he left CBS before Mr. Cronkite was the anchor. Because of an editing error, the appraisal also misstated the name of the news agency for which Mr. Cronkite was Moscow bureau chief after World War II. At that time it was United Press, not United Press International.
Deadline pressure can certainly lead to errors; one could imagine that the author of the obit/appraisal, Alessandra Stanley, was pressed for time, or that maybe the sudden passing of Cronkite left the NYT's editors unable to fact-check as carefully as they otherwise would have, but in fact Stanley wrote the piece, and gave it to her editor, one month before Cronkite's death. The New York Times' public editor Clark Hoyt explains, though, in a piece titled How Did This Happen? that the piece was submitted on a "Friday, a heavy time for the culture department, which was processing copy for Saturday, Sunday and Monday."
A full ten days after the first correction was published, this second correction was added underneath it:
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
An appraisal on July 18 about Walter Cronkite’s career misstated the name of the ABC evening news broadcast. While the program was called “World News Tonight” when Charles Gibson became anchor in May 2006, it is now “World News With Charles Gibson,” not “World News Tonight With Charles Gibson.”
No word on whether it took the NYT thirteen days to issue that last correction, or if it took that long for ABC employees and execs to notice that their flagship news broadcast had been incorrectly named in America's supposedly most consequential and influential newspaper.
Posted by EBD at August 3, 2009 1:06 PMThat old gray mare can't go to the glue factory soon enough.
Syncro
Posted by: syncrodox at August 3, 2009 1:19 PMCorrections are tough when you still use Selectrics & white out
Posted by: Fred at August 3, 2009 1:21 PMMaybe they thought no one would notice the lack of diligence in getting the information correct. Either she is overworked or very careless. Either way inexcusable.
Posted by: fernstalbert at August 3, 2009 1:25 PMfernstalbert:
inexcusable? have you noticed the state of (MSM)journalism today. as long as you say good things about one idealogical group and bad things about the other facts aren't that important
Well, other than that, I see no reason not to proceed with a hefty bonus and promotion!
Posted by: Snagglepuss at August 3, 2009 2:22 PMI think these errors are the type that are endemic in today's society. People really seem not to care about details anymore. As long as the broad brush strokes have been painted, that is viewed as good enough.
Posted by: Erik Larsen at August 3, 2009 2:32 PMDear bdogginit - you are absolutely right. I have a misplaced hope and faith that one day we may end up with a MSM that reports the news facts and does not add editorial comment at every opportunity. Regarding Walter Cronkite, if he was such a "hero" to the mainstream media, why would you not take more care with your accolades? I guess its a case of "what have you done for me lately". Cheers.
Posted by: fernstalbert at August 3, 2009 2:34 PMCheck out Canada's own Deborah Gyapong (Google her name for her fabulous blog).
She's been extensively covering the "Communion Scandal" (“Denigrate Stephen Harper Any Which Way: to Hell with the Truth”) and the utter duplicity of the Telegraph Journal newspaper—as well as the complicity of the CBC and a number of other political operatives.
Bit by bit, the depravity of the left—the MSM are major players—is being exposed in the US and here. For those who have the ears to hear and the eyes to see, the skulduggery of the left is playing like a James Bond movie—only in real time. Let’s hope people wake up before it’s too late.
I don't think that anyone should take the news media seriously. Since their inception newspapers have been propaganda arms of their publishers. I never understood why people thought modern newspapers, radio and television should be any different. The biggest change is the advent of readily available publishing power (internet, blogs) which allows other points of view to become available. The greatest problem all media is having is over saturation of information. The audience is no longer paying attention because there is so much information and so much of that information generates a vague feeling of unease. Thus people either feel guilty for being alive or simply turn off the nattering nabobs of negativity. As the old song says, "I get all the news I need on the weather report".
Posted by: Joe at August 3, 2009 3:10 PMFor me, the treatment in the press of, and the apparent detachment of people from, the death of Walter Cronkite is appalling....worse than appalling.
Walter Cronkite, quite simply, is the greatest traitor to the United States since Benedict Arnold and should so be regarded by history. And not a mention, not a flicker of this truth did I come across.
Vietnam will mark the start of the decline and fall, and Walter Cronkite should be held chiefly responsible, IMHO
Posted by: cottus at August 3, 2009 3:17 PMIf details were important, the corrections would be posted on the front page. The MSM knows their flock.
Posted by: Knacker at August 3, 2009 4:05 PMNo surprise that the Slimes can't get anything right. They've been getting away with making crap up for 40 years. This time they just couldn't be bothered to fact check.... forgot it was one of their own they were talking about.
As for Cronkite .....
It was remarked on widely ( at least in my family and friends ) that Cronkite was full of shit in the matter of his reporting on Vietnam. Tet offensive reports were in direct contradiction of the facts and it was noticed at the time. Most people felt he was going senile. I thought the level of vitriol he showed was because he had an axe to grind. Perhaps a scycle?
IN any case the media of the day began falling over itself to find relevance in what they perceived to be the new mainstream and common outlook. That of the radical left. They have been doing so to this day without let up.
Eventually the consequence of that pandering had to find it's way into the halls of power.
And so ...... Barack Hussein Obama ..... the student accolyte of America's radical left and racist black movement.
Posted by: OMMAG at August 3, 2009 4:18 PMErik Larsen:
The errors in this article are trivial and don't bother me much. What infuriates me is how editors and reporters handle those "broad brush strokes", to use Erik Larsen's phrase. If they could just confine their agendas to the editorial page, I'd be happy. Perhaps I'm too easily pleased.
I didn't mean to include Erik's name twice in my post. I guess I'm in no position to criticize the Times' proof-readers.
Posted by: RSP at August 3, 2009 5:29 PM
Good Lord that was a lot of mistakes.
But, on the other hand, more than likely the 10 people who read it didn't know the difference.
It seems to me I read some time ago that obits of famous people are written in advance so that they can be published as soon as the subject kicks the bucket. Was Cronkite not famous enough to have his prepared in advance? I think not. The New York Slimes has no excuse, if you ask me.
Posted by: Louise at August 3, 2009 5:59 PMThe G&M is far worse for mistakes like that, only they just edit on the fly and don't indicate that corrections were made.
Posted by: allan at August 3, 2009 6:02 PMJoe @ 3:10, you're right. I have to smirk disrespectfully at this tired old meme from the left that media concentration is a bad thing, as if fewer newspapers and television networks means fewer points of view and control of information by evil media magnets. If anything, the internet has created a flowering of vastly expanded opinion and in many cases the elimination of the middle man (ie reporters). Hell, I read online news articles from papers published all over the world every day, not to mention dozens of good blogs by ordinary citizens from all over the world.
Posted by: Louise at August 3, 2009 6:06 PMhttp://www.sodahead.com/question/483983/did-tommy-mottola-help-kill-michael-jackson/
DID TOMMY MOTTOLA (Italian-American) HELP KILL MICHAEL JACKSON ?
Posted by: michael at August 3, 2009 7:02 PMGeez, Louise, cut 'em some slack - they did manage to spell both 'Walter' and 'Cronkite' correctly. That's gotta count for something. :)
Posted by: Kathryn at August 3, 2009 7:32 PMControversy of Sony got rich again using
Whitney Houston not Michael Jackson- smell fishy
Italian revenge from TOMMY MOTTOLA against
Michael Jackson:
http://www.starpulse.com/news/index.php/2009/07/30/whitney_houston_to_replace_michael_jacks_1
Western artist men and women are live with pitty!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,75046,00.html
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Michael_Jackson
Michael life story and his 4 children and his bankruptcy link with Sony Italian gang over money
Do what I told you to do or I broke you and I defame you and made all people hated you
Italian ways! Is defamation of Whitney Houston is link with TOMMY MOTTOLA
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/michael-jackson/5942693/Robbie-Williams-and-Whitney-Houston-to-step-in-for-Michael-Jackson-at-O2.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWyZKohl75A
http://www.celebritymound.com/whitney-houston-drove-me-to-drugs/
====
Whitney Houston enters drug rehab facility. (Celebrities) on April 5. 2004, in year fall of Michael Jackson
===
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83QNRnRK6L4
All riches and bitchs life style lead to was Trained by their master like: TOMMY MOTTOLA
Girls naked, alcohol, drugs, songs, money and powers all doctors in their home and hired all children to teach them how to continue their life style
==
the person must charged for child molesting are head of all public film and song producers who all those are start hiring children in early age time and end them in their 50 with full drug and adultery and nothing else. is multi billion dollar business in world, Western artist men and women are live with pity! How black and Muslim are hit by racist attack, For sake of money and power, Hate is not because of color hate is because of culture and method of both parties like to made money here in West
---
recently take a years to target get destroyed or business ruined by plan of defamtion by organized crime bundle team work- revenge by hate crime
power of sony seems dangerous to me
michael.....that's a nisa....but readre's tips is a couple of post above.
Walter Cronkite.The greatest ally the Viet Cong ever had.Just ask Gen.Yip.
Posted by: Justthinkin at August 3, 2009 9:24 PMWhy are all you wingnuts so angry at the New York Times? It pushed all the lies that helped launch the invasion you all wanted so much.
Ingrates!
Posted by: Troll at August 4, 2009 9:49 AMPicky. Picky.
It's hard to get good cut and paste help these days.
Posted by: Sgt Lejaune at August 4, 2009 9:58 AMdoes anyone give a shit?
Posted by: old white guy at August 4, 2009 5:13 PMFactually wrong but nonetheless(Dan)Rather good.
Posted by: EyesWideShut at August 5, 2009 3:21 PM