AP reporter, editor fired over error

[Moderator1]

Does the punishment fit the crime?

http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/latest-news/ap-fires-reporter-editor-over-mcauliffe-error/article_f6124b90-3a97-11e3-be61-001a4bcf6878.html


Edited to fix MY error, though this one probably isn't an offense that will get me canned. Just slapped in the head for being stupid.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

Re: AP reporter, editor fired over editor

It's very harsh, but putting up an erroneous story charging a gubernatorial candidate with involvement in crime is a very big mistake.

 

[MisterCreosote]

Re: AP reporter, editor fired over editor

If this isn't a fireable offense, I'm not sure one exists.

 

[WriteThinking]

Re: AP reporter, editor fired over editor

I didn't see the retracted story, but I would have liked to have seen more reference to the supposed lie to a federal official.

Based on what's here, yes, Lewis and Potter should have been fired because saying someone lied is not a mistake. Saying, perhaps, that McAuliffe was reportedly unknowingly involved in the investigated scheme, and then finding that to be not the case could be a mistake. But saying someone lied about it?

Where did that come from? Was there any information to back that up in the retracted story, and from whom/where did it come from?

It's hard to believe a seasoned, apparently well-respected political reporter would have just written, out of the blue, that McAuliffe lied, unless there was something else included in the original story.

 

[Hoos3725]

Re: AP reporter, editor fired over editor

What is the editor's responsibility in this situation? If she asks the reporter "what is your evidence that McAuliffe lied?" And he lays out x, y and z, and it all sounds legitimate and well sourced, what is she supposed to do? It seems to me many editors wouldn't do much more than that.

 

[MisterCreosote]

Re: AP reporter, editor fired over editor

What is the editor's responsibility in this situation? If she asks the reporter "what is your evidence that McAuliffe lied?" And he lays out x, y and z, and it all sounds legitimate and well sourced, what is she supposed to do? It seems to me many editors wouldn't do much more than that.

If I'm the editor, my reporter better come to me with more solid sourcing than "The person who lied according to the indictment has the same initials as our gubernatorial candidate. It must be him!"

 

[Hoos3725]

What is the editor's responsibility in this situation? If she asks the reporter "what is your evidence that McAuliffe lied?" And he lays out x, y and z, and it all sounds legitimate and well sourced, what is she supposed to do? It seems to me many editors wouldn't do much more than that.

If I'm the editor, my reporter better come to me with more solid sourcing than "The person who lied according to the indictment has the same initials as our gubernatorial candidate. It must be him!"

How do you know he made that assumption? What if he had other reasons to believe what he wrote?

 

[Riptide]

Does the punishment fit the crime?

http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/latest-news/ap-fires-reporter-editor-over-mcauliffe-error/article_f6124b90-3a97-11e3-be61-001a4bcf6878.html


Edited to fix MY error, though this one probably isn't an offense that will get me canned. Just slapped in the head for being stupid.

It's good that you didn't get a spanking.
Word on the street says that would be horrible.

 

[MisterCreosote]

What is the editor's responsibility in this situation? If she asks the reporter "what is your evidence that McAuliffe lied?" And he lays out x, y and z, and it all sounds legitimate and well sourced, what is she supposed to do? It seems to me many editors wouldn't do much more than that.

If I'm the editor, my reporter better come to me with more solid sourcing than "The person who lied according to the indictment has the same initials as our gubernatorial candidate. It must be him!"

How do you know he made that assumption? What if he had other reasons to believe what he wrote?

If he had other reasons, I'd like to think the story wouldn't have been retracted in just 90 minutes.

This is the retraction:

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — The Associated Press has withdrawn its story about documents in a federal fraud case alleging that Virginia Democratic gubernatorial nominee Terry McAuliffe lied to a federal official investigating a death benefits scheme. The indictment did not identify McAuliffe as the "T.M." who allegedly lied to investigators.

 

[Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!!]

One more axed.

The Associated Press has fired a third staffer in the fallout of an erroneous report about gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe.
Norm Gomlak, an editor on the AP’s South Desk in Atlanta, was the first staffer outside the Richmond, Va., bureau to lose his job. Employees in the Atlanta office were given the news in a staff meeting Monday

 

[YankeeFan]

Didn't get much notice the night it happened:

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/threads/97680/

 

[Big Circus]

Several people are saying that the Cuccinelli campaign fed Lewis the story:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/ap-reporters-mistake-did-the-punishment-fit-the-crime/2013/10/22/95b32b64-3b52-11e3-a94f-b58017bfee6c_story_1.html

On another note, I'd argue that the quickness in retracting the story is a pretty big indictment on Lewis' work on the story. If it only took a couple of hours of due diligence to determine that the story was false, that implies that the reporter and editor should have done that work themselves.

 

[Spartan Squad]

Punishment for sure fit the crime. It would have been reasonable for McAuliffe's people to bring suit against the AP, especially if the error was discovered that quickly after breaking the story.

To echo a few others here, I am curious what evidence the reporter had to begin with that prompted the editor to green light the story. If it was only "TM shares the same initials as Terry McAuliffe" and "his opponent seems to think this is him," then for sure getting fired was justifiable.

 

[Drip]

Memo to all: LET'S BE CAREFUL OUT THERE!!!!!

 

[Born to Run]

I saw somewhere when this first came out that McAuliffe was identified as TM in one part of the indictment. Sorry if I'm mistaken

 

[clutchcargo]

Other than McAuliffe being quoted saying he did not know about the allegations, how do we know for sure that the "T.M." referenced is NOT McAuliffe?

From the linked story: "In a bulletin that night killing the story about 90 minutes after it was first posted, AP said 'the indictment did not identify McAuliffe as the ‘T.M.’ who allegedly lied to investigators.' "

OK, so who DID the indictment identify as the T.M. if it wasn't McAuliffe? Based on my interpretation of what's reported here, something is still missing. I don't see the indisputable evidence that the AP reporter and editor are wrong. Sorry, but McAuliffe's quote that he didn't know of the allegation isn't good enough for me.

 

[Shoeless Joe]

No big deal. Just make sure you get the story out there first, tweet about it, like it, and do a video blog for the web site. After that, when you come back from your furlough, do some checking to see if there is any truth to the story. If it's wrong, we can just take it down.

 

[MisterCreosote]

Other than McAuliffe being quoted saying he did not know about the allegations, how do we know for sure that the "T.M." referenced is NOT McAuliffe?

From the linked story: "In a bulletin that night killing the story about 90 minutes after it was first posted, AP said 'the indictment did not identify McAuliffe as the ‘T.M.’ who allegedly lied to investigators.' "

OK, so who DID the indictment identify as the T.M. if it wasn't McAuliffe? Based on my interpretation of what's reported here, something is still missing. I don't see the indisputable evidence that the AP reporter and editor are wrong. Sorry, but McAuliffe's quote that he didn't know of the allegation isn't good enough for me.

Are you suggesting that The Associated Press retracted a huge and perfectly true story within 90 minutes of publication, and fired three people for writing or editing it, for no good reason at all?

 

[MileHigh]

I think he's asking: Who specifically is T.M.

 

[linotype]

Other than McAuliffe being quoted saying he did not know about the allegations, how do we know for sure that the "T.M." referenced is NOT McAuliffe?

From the linked story: "In a bulletin that night killing the story about 90 minutes after it was first posted, AP said 'the indictment did not identify McAuliffe as the ‘T.M.’ who allegedly lied to investigators.' "

OK, so who DID the indictment identify as the T.M. if it wasn't McAuliffe? Based on my interpretation of what's reported here, something is still missing. I don't see the indisputable evidence that the AP reporter and editor are wrong. Sorry, but McAuliffe's quote that he didn't know of the allegation isn't good enough for me.

According to this TV station's comprehensive account, there are two TMs in the indictment. One set of TMs is definitely McAuliffe but either the other one is a different person with the TM initials, or there is a typo in the non-McAuliffe TM.

http://blogs.nbc12.com/decisionvirginia/2013/10/how-tm-became-terry-mcauliffe.html