Journalism is in the Toilet

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

I'm sure all of us remember the absolutely nuclear story that Trump called the Georgia election investigator and threatened him to "find the fraud". Many here absolutely lost their mind over the call. It was used by the Dems to justify the second impeachment. Only problem is, the Washington Post completely shit the bed on the story and recently issued a lengthy retraction.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/543271-wapost-adds-lengthy-correction-to-story-on-trump-georgia-call


"Trump did not tell the investigator to 'find the fraud' or say she would be 'a national hero' if she did so. Instead, Trump urged the investigator to scrutinize ballots in Fulton County, Ga., asserting she would find 'dishonesty' there. He also told her that she had 'the most important job in the country right now.'"

The correction comes days after The Wall Street Journal obtained audio of the December call between Trump and the investigator.

For those of who who consistently scoff at the idea that journalism has degenerated into something not worth paying attention to, this is a mistake so huge and so potentially earth shattering that it cannot be dismissed or minimized. This kind of thing will only fuel the accusations of bias and shoddy reporting, and rightly so. One also has to wonder if this correction would ever have been issued if the WSJ hadn't obtained the actual audio of the call. I may be a bit on the cynical side, but I'm leaning heavily into "not a chance" on that one.

[Belsnickel]

(03-16-2021, 06:44 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'm sure all of us remember the absolutely nuclear story that Trump called the Georgia election investigator and threatened him to "find the fraud". Many here absolutely lost their mind over the call. It was used by the Dems to justify the second impeachment. Only problem is, the Washington Post completely shit the bed on the story and recently issued a lengthy retraction.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/543271-wapost-adds-lengthy-correction-to-story-on-trump-georgia-call


"Trump did not tell the investigator to 'find the fraud' or say she would be 'a national hero' if she did so. Instead, Trump urged the investigator to scrutinize ballots in Fulton County, Ga., asserting she would find 'dishonesty' there. He also told her that she had 'the most important job in the country right now.'"

The correction comes days after The Wall Street Journal obtained audio of the December call between Trump and the investigator.

For those of who who consistently scoff at the idea that journalism has degenerated into something not worth paying attention to, this is a mistake so huge and so potentially earth shattering that it cannot be dismissed or minimized. This kind of thing will only fuel the accusations of bias and shoddy reporting, and rightly so. One also has to wonder if this correction would ever have been issued if the WSJ hadn't obtained the actual audio of the call. I may be a bit on the cynical side, but I'm leaning heavily into "not a chance" on that one.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall listening to the audio and hearing Trump asking the GA SoS to find the number of votes he needed to win Georgia.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-16-2021, 06:49 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall listening to the audio and hearing Trump asking the GA SoS to find the number of votes he needed to win Georgia.

If he did, and I haven't listened to the audio, it was not done in the way reported.  From what I'm reading Trump directed them to certain counties in which he believed that fraud had occurred.  But I will defer to you in this regard as you've heard them.  However, none of this addresses the egregious errors in the original article.

[TheUberHuber]

(03-16-2021, 06:54 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:

(03-12-2021, 09:48 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: I appreciate brownshoe’s comments.  In that same vein, making ‘mail in’ voting more secure seems like the next logical step.   But I don’t think that’s on the table.  


This topic reminds me of a moment I had with my father 30+ yrs ago, where he essentially explained to me that we, as what I assumed was a “middle class” family were not far removed from what I had somehow associated with the “poor”.   He’s was a deeply malprogramed republican at this point, so it’s even more poignant upon reflection.  Bottom line, the vast majority of the population is on the same side, the ‘have nots’.    I can’t imagine anyone here is really in a position to significantly benefit from the voter oppression of others.

If he did, and I haven't listened to the audio, it was not done in the way reported.  From what I'm reading Trump directed them to certain counties in which he believed that fraud had occurred.  But I will defer to you in this regard as you've heard them.  However, none of this addresses the egregious errors in the original article.

Regardless of nyt, the call was inappropriate and could be evidence in a criminal investigation.  maybe actually listen to it before making a thread about it. Also, they made a correction,  which is how journalism works. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-16-2021, 07:15 PM)TheUberHuber Wrote: Regardless of nyt, the call was inappropriate and could be evidence in a criminal investigation.

Or The Washington Post, which is what the article is about.


 

Quote:maybe actually listen to it before making a thread about it. Also, they made a correction,  which is how journalism works. 

Sound advice, too bad the people at The Washington Post didn't heed it.  Quality post as always, btw. 

[CJD]

(03-16-2021, 06:44 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'm sure all of us remember the absolutely nuclear story that Trump called the Georgia election investigator and threatened him to "find the fraud".  Many here absolutely lost their mind over the call.  It was used by the Dems to justify the second impeachment.  Only problem is, the Washington Post completely shit the bed on the story and recently issued a lengthy retraction.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/543271-wapost-adds-lengthy-correction-to-story-on-trump-georgia-call


"Trump did not tell the investigator to 'find the fraud' or say she would be 'a national hero' if she did so. Instead, Trump urged the investigator to scrutinize ballots in Fulton County, Ga., asserting she would find 'dishonesty' there. He also told her that she had 'the most important job in the country right now.'"

The correction comes days after The Wall Street Journal obtained audio of the December call between Trump and the investigator.

For those of who who consistently scoff at the idea that journalism has degenerated into something not worth paying attention to, this is a mistake so huge and so potentially earth shattering that it cannot be dismissed or minimized.  This kind of thing will only fuel the accusations of bias and shoddy reporting, and rightly so.  One also has to wonder if this correction would ever have been issued if the WSJ hadn't obtained the actual audio of the call.  I may be a bit on the cynical side, but I'm leaning heavily into "not a chance" on that one.

I think this may be a second call that was unearthed. I personally don't remember when it was released and never really looked into it. The call that was used in the impeachment was the one he had with Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia Secretary of State.

This is the transcript of that call:
https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-nw-trump-georgia-phone-call-transcript-20210104-ivcio2yuyfgm7onlm4vipxpmzu-htmlstory.html

I don't know what's going on with this second call, but based on that transcript, I'm pretty sure the impeachment was accurate in its depiction of the conversation.

[TheUberHuber]

(03-16-2021, 07:29 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Or The Washington Post, which is what the article is about.


 
Sound advice, too bad the people at The Washington Post didn't heed it.  Quality post as always, btw. 

It is not that different than what was actually said. Not sure how that is "earth shattering." But if it fits your narrative... 

[fredtoast]

The transcript of the conversation has been available since Jan 2.

Trump never used the term "find these votes", but he said basically the same thing with "work out these numbers".  And he did not use the term "national hero" but instead "really respected.  The Post was wrong not to use exact quotes, but it is not like the story was a blatant lie.  It is just quibbling over semantics.    Here is the direct quote.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/03/politics/trump-brad-raffensperger-phone-call-transcript/index.html

TRUMP: ".  .  .   And you would be respected. Really respected, if this thing could be straightened out before the election. You have a big election coming up on Tuesday. And therefore I think that it is really important that you meet tomorrow and work out on these numbers. Because I know Brad that if you think we're right, I think you're going to say, and I'm not looking to blame anybody. I'm just saying you know, and, you know, under new counts, and under uh, new views, of the election results, we won the election. You know? It's very simple. We won the election."


Earlier in the conversation Trump repeatedly accused Georgia Sec of State George Raffensperger of criminal activity.  It was clearly an attempt to intimidate him.

[GMDino]

(03-16-2021, 06:49 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall listening to the audio and hearing Trump asking the GA SoS to find the number of votes he needed to win Georgia.

You're right.  That's a different, longer call.

https://www.vox.com/2021/3/16/22333805/washington-post-correction-trump-georgia

Quote:On January 3, the Washington Post’s Amy Gardner broke the news that, in an hourlong recorded phone call, President Donald Trump repeatedly pressured Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to somehow change the results in the state to deliver him a victory. The Post published the full audio and transcript of that call, and it received enormous media attention.


Six days later, in the wake of the storming of the Capitol, Gardner broke a follow-up story revealing that Trump had a similar phone call with another Georgia official, Raffensperger’s lead investigator Frances Watson. This time around, there was no audio or transcript of that call available, so Gardner’s story was attributed to an an anonymous state official. The official claimed that, on the call, Trump said Watson should “find the fraud” and could become a “national hero” by doing so.


But according to a newly surfaced recording of the call with Watson, Trump did not in fact use those exact words. He did say she could find “dishonesty” in Fulton County, and that “when the right answer comes out, you’ll be praised.” But the language of the quotes the Post attributed to Trump were not accurate. As a result, the Post had to run a prominent correction. Trump and conservatives are now scorning the paper, and even some mainstream reporters are looking askance and wondering how it happened.


The correction was merited — it’s important for reporters (and their sources) to be careful in attributing exact language in quotes. And it is unfortunate that these incorrect quotes spread so widely. (Vox also wrote about the Post story in an article that has now been corrected.)


However, Trump has used the correction to claim in a statement that “the original story was a Hoax, right from the very beginning,” which is untrue. The original story that got so much attention was Trump’s call with Raffensperger, for which we had the full and accurate transcript all along. It has not been corrected. Furthermore, it remains the case that Trump did in fact call Watson to insist he won the state and that she should turn up evidence revealing fraud. “The country is counting on it,” he said.


Overall, the Post’s correction changes what we know about the exact words Trump said to Watson, but it doesn’t fundamentally change our understanding of what Trump was saying to Georgia state officials at the time.

Of course Trump is now claiming that the ENTIRE story was a "hoax" because now we know exactly what was said vs the original source.

The new information is because they found a copy of the audio on a computer.

So now we have actual wording which isn't that different than the original reports.

https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Recording-reveals-details-of-Trump-call-to-16018856.php

Quote:The Washington Post reported on the substance of Trump's Dec. 23 call in January, describing him saying that Watson should "find the fraud" and that she would be a "national hero," based on an account from Jordan Fuchs, the deputy secretary of state, whom Watson briefed on his comments.


In fact, he did not use those precise words.


Rather, Trump urged the investigator to scrutinize Fulton County, where she would find "dishonesty," he said.


He also said, "whatever you can do, Frances, it would be - it's a great thing. It's an important thing for the country. So important. You've no idea. So important. And I very much appreciate it."
When The Post first reported on the call, state officials said they did not believe that a recording existed. Officials located the recording on a trash folder on Watson's device while responding to a public records request, according to a person familiar with the situation, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the internal process.


Watson has not responded to requests for comment. The Post originally withheld her name because of the risk of threats and harassment directed at election officials.

A spokesman for Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In other words "journalism" reported on the story and as more information has come to light the specifics have been noted and changed.  As good journalism should do.  It's like a police officer doing an investigation and finding out new, better evidence and changing how they approach the event they are looking in to. 

Here is the transcript of the call.

https://www.businessinsider.com/transcript-trump-pressures-another-georgia-elections-official-to-find-fraud-2021-3

The call from Trump was still uncalled for and he still sounds pitiful.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-16-2021, 08:05 PM)GMDino Wrote: In other words "journalism" reported on the story and as more information has come to light the specifics have been noted and changed.  As good journalism should do.  It's like a police officer doing an investigation and finding out new, better evidence and changing how they approach the event they are looking in to. 

No, it's not like that at all.  When you quote someone and get it wrong that's a major error.  There's also the issue with the retraction not being made until after the WSJ obtained the tapes.  Now, your analogy would hold water if the police arrested someone with false information, quoting them as saying something they never said and then not owning it until a third party got ahold of the transcripts that proved the error.

[GMDino]

(03-16-2021, 07:53 PM)TheUberHuber Wrote: It is not that different than what was actually said. Not sure how that is "earth shattering." But if it fits your narrative... 

People are always trying to jump on corrections as proof that everything in the story was wrong.  Trump did it too with this story.

Attacking the media is the easiest way to get people to distrust the information out there...even when the media does their job and corrects any mistakes.  

[fredtoast]

(03-16-2021, 08:05 PM)GMDino Wrote: You're right.  That's a different, longer call.

https://www.vox.com/2021/3/16/22333805/washington-post-correction-trump-georgia




Of course Trump is now claiming that the ENTIRE story was a "hoax" because now we know exactly what was said vs the original source.

The new information is because they found a copy of the audio on a computer.

So now we have actual wording which isn't that different than the original reports.

https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Recording-reveals-details-of-Trump-call-to-16018856.php



In other words "journalism" reported on the story and as more information has come to light the specifics have been noted and changed.  As good journalism should do.  It's like a police officer doing an investigation and finding out new, better evidence and changing how they approach the event they are looking in to. 

Here is the transcript of the call.

https://www.businessinsider.com/transcript-trump-pressures-another-georgia-elections-official-to-find-fraud-2021-3

The call from Trump was still uncalled for and he still sounds pitiful.

I did not know about this second conversation and story.  But seems like the same thing as in my previous comments.  The Post was wrong for using the wrong exact quote, but it did not really change the meaning of what he was saying.

Post should be criticized, but there is nothing "huge and potentially earth shattering".  The only place you will find that type of hyperbole is in the right-wing echo chamber.

[GMDino]

(03-16-2021, 08:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I did not know about this second conversation and story.  But seems like the same thing as in my previous comments.  The Post was wrong for using the wrong exact quote, but it did not really change the meaning of what he was saying.

Post should be criticized, but there is nothing "huge and potentially earth shattering".  The only place you will find that type of hyperbole is in the right-wing echo chamber.

Exactly.  Corrections happen quite often.  It's an admission of something done in error or that new information changed the story.

But too often, as I said above, any mistake is used to say the entire story is "fake" or "overblown".  Journalism certainly isn't a perfect science but that they do correct themselves says more about their honesty than anything else.

[TheUberHuber]

(03-16-2021, 08:15 PM)GMDino Wrote: People are always trying to jump on corrections as proof that everything in the story was wrong.  Trump did it too with this story.

Attacking the media is the easiest way to get people to distrust the information out there...even when the media does their job and corrects any mistakes.  

Yeah, he posted a thread about how journalism is dead. And then proceeded to give a literal example of how journalism works. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-17-2021, 12:55 AM)TheUberHuber Wrote: Yeah, he posted a thread about how journalism is dead. And then proceeded to give a literal example of how journalism works. 

I wasn't aware an example of journalism working was reporting erroneous quotes and then correcting them two months later after an independent party obtains proof you reported bullshit.  Quite the journalistic standards you've got there.

[TheUberHuber]

(03-17-2021, 01:01 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I wasn't aware an example of journalism working was reporting erroneous quotes and then correcting them two months later after an independent party obtains proof you reported bullshit.  Quite the journalistic standards you've got there.

First time huh...

[Vas Deferens]

This is a really weird thread. Definitely heard daddy say some erroneous things and command GA officials to find votes. How does this second call negate any of that?

[TheUberHuber]

(03-17-2021, 01:01 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I wasn't aware an example of journalism working was reporting erroneous quotes and then correcting them two months later after an independent party obtains proof you reported bullshit.  Quite the journalistic standards you've got there.

This is the false premise.  They were not erroneous at all. Pretty similar to what was actually said.  

[GMDino]

(03-17-2021, 02:13 AM)Vas Deferens Wrote: This is a really weird thread.   Definitely heard daddy say some erroneous things and command GA officials to find votes.   How does this second call negate any of that?

It doesn't.  The thread is intended to denigrate all journalism because they admitted an error and corrected it when better information came out.  

Trump did the exact same thing calling the entire story a "hoax" and therefore invalidating his second impeachment.  So it's not surprising to see others jump to his defense the same way.

[BmorePat87]

https://www.ajc.com/politics/georgia-official-clarifies-earlier-report-on-trump-call-to-a-georgia-investigator/WQPJG3F7MJEJ7EQJHLNVUEGYLY/

I remember a lot of responses to his call with the Secretary of State which was accurate as it was the audio released by the Secretary of State.

I don't remember this one, but according to that article, the investigator to whom Trump spoke to was the one who characterized the call that way and their office put out the report that was then repeated by the media. Your issue seems to be with the Georgia officials, not the media that immediately corrected their story after it was revealed that the report that the officials put out was erroneous.