Washington Post: Will the New York Times ever finish cleaning up the Hillary Clinton story?
....The piece in question, published on July 23, originally alleged that two federal inspectors general had issued criminal referrals targeting Clinton for her use of e-mail during her tenure as secretary of state. As it turned out, only one IG had made a referral; it wasn’t criminal in nature; and it didn’t directly target Clinton. The story carries two corrections but still needs another: Whereas only one IG made the referral, the Times story still says that referrals came from two IGs....
Yet the New York Times story remains defiant:
"Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open an investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday."
The irony here is that this error has sat uncorrected for 11 days on an article that Times editors apologized for being slow to correct. “We should have explained to our readers right away what happened here, as soon as we knew it,” said Baquet to New York Times Public Editor Margaret Sullivan.
The Erik Wemple Blog asked New York Times Associate Managing Editor for Standards Phil Corbett this morning why the paper hadn’t addressed the bogus double-IG referral question. He responded that he would check on the situation....
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2015/08/03/will-the-new-york-times-ever-finish-cleaning-up-clinton-story/
= new reply since forum marked as read
