Friday, December 30, 2005

Red book liar says sorry as paper CYAs.

Nation: They still haven't named the student.

"... But in the end, it really doesn't matter whether a source lied, especially if the lie he is telling causes harm to others, because we in the press are the ones who make it public. We must be as sure as we can that a source is telling us the truth. And it's far wiser to evaluate a source firsthand, even if it means that we don't publish a story as soon as we would like -- or at all. People bring us information for all sorts of reasons: for payback against their enemies, to further a cause they believe in, to do the right thing, to get attention from other people. It isn't always easy to know the difference between motives that are pure and motives that are not, stories that are true and stories that are lies. We -- reporter and editors -- failed here because we put our faith in what two college professors told us. We should have held off publishing the story until we had a chance to judge the student's credibility for ourselves. As for the student in the story, he sent an apology to Mr. Nicodemus. It said, in part: "The fact is that my being panicked about this hole (sic) event led me to unfortunately prop up my story (i.e., fabricate it), for that I have to apologize to you and to my professors. I have spoken to my family about the whole issue and the fact is that they were understandibly (sic) angry. My name has been dishonored within my family and so I will spend the rest of the winter trying to restore even a little bit of it back, at least."
The problem with this story is the editor and reporter did not do their jobs in making sure the story was correct, it was all based on he said/he said with no proof that it actually happened. You would think going by the "high standards" you see proclaimed by various pundits the print media says it has running the industry, at least the reporter should fall on the sword.

Copyright Narbosa 1998-2006
Weblog Commenting and Trackback by