Still Seeking a Correction
In a front-page article on August 20, the Los Angeles Times made this incorrect statement:
None of the men in the Swift boat group behind the anti-Kerry ad, including [Larry] Thurlow, served on Kerry’s patrol boat during the war.
I wrote an e-mail to Jamie Gold, the “Readers’ Representative” at the Los Angeles Times, pointing out that Steven Gardner, a member of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, served on one of Kerry’s patrol boats during the war.
It has been six days, and I have received no response, and have seen no correction. We have seen corrections on the spelling of a French spinter’s surname, the spelling of a gymnastics coach’s surname, the age of playwright Arthur Miller, and the starting time of a memorial to Gypsy Boots. But no correction of this clear error, which occurred in a front-page story about a topic of intense national interest.
So, today I wrote an e-mail to Managing Editor Dean Baquet. Here it is:
Dear Mr. Baquet,
I sent the attached e-mail to your Reader’s Representative six days ago, regarding an error in a front-page story in your paper on the Swift Boat Vets.
I am forwarding the e-mail to you because I have received no response and have seen no correction. I know that the Reader’s Rep is very busy, and will get back to me eventually. However, the error I have pointed out should be corrected immediately, while the controversy is in the public eye, so that your readers can form an opinion on the issue based on accurate facts.
That the paper made an error is beyond any rational dispute. It occurred in a front-page story on a topic of intense national interest. A correction should have run days ago. I urge your paper to correct the error immediately.
Thank you for your time.
Patrick Frey
As always, I’ll keep you up to date on any response.
CORRECTION: This post originally said that the Times had corrected “the age of playwright Arthur Miller when he died” — confusing many commenters who know that Miller is still alive. Where did I get the idea that Arthur Miller died? I have no idea. It didn’t say that in the Times correction. I just plain got it wrong. He’s still alive. The post has been corrected.
Amazing. I got something wrong, and I am correcting it. Hey, L.A. Times editors: see how easy that is?
UPDATE: A commenter reports that a correction will run tomorrow, according to an e-mail that the commenter received today from one of the reporters.
UPDATE x2: Thanks to Instapundit for the link. I hope new readers will take a moment to bookmark/blogroll the site, and please return often — in particular tomorrow, to see whether the correction has been issued.
UPDATE x3: I did receive an e-mail today from the Reader’s Representative, who said that she is “still awaiting word back from the national desk regarding a correction.” However, my commenter’s e-mail sounds pretty authoritative. I’m guessing the correction is going to run.
UPDATE x4 [from August 27]: The correction has run. Thanks to Instapundit, without whom I doubt anything would have happened this quickly.
It is the character problem on the left. Error is not permissible.
===
–==–
There is a big difference between William Calley and John Kerry. William Calley is a proven war criminal. For John Kerry we only have his word as an officer and a gentleman.
What is the War Hero Afraid of?
Form 180. Release ALL the records.
The Ads: Video links
Comment by M. Simon — 8/26/2004 @ 7:44 am
The reader’s rep probably has you in his kill list by now.
Comment by Kevin Murphy — 8/26/2004 @ 11:00 am
Arthur Miller has an age, but it isn’t what it was when he died, because he hasn’t. I trust you’ll run a correction…
Comment by Mike G — 8/26/2004 @ 12:13 pm
Hey! Conservatives are actually very indebted to the laziness and sloppiness of the Media … if they were conscientious and careful, the Swiftboat liars for preposterous mendacity (Slap-Em!) would have had only days rather than weeks of faux credibility.
Comment by oldradus — 8/26/2004 @ 12:17 pm
Holy crap! Arthur Miller’s dead?! That REALLY bums me out. When did it happen? I wonder why I haven’t heard about that until now…
Comment by D.J. — 8/26/2004 @ 12:19 pm
Try to understand: they’re heads are still spinning from their newly-commissioned poll showing Bush taking the lead.
Comment by David Held — 8/26/2004 @ 12:20 pm
Try to understand: they’re heads are still spinning from their newly-commissioned poll showing Bush taking the lead.
Comment by David Held — 8/26/2004 @ 12:20 pm
Useless rhetoric; the dysfunctional, gulit-free, pathologically-dishonest Left’s only defense. Thanks for fueling the fire, oldradus…
Comment by 6Gun — 8/26/2004 @ 12:22 pm
Arthur Miller is definitely still alive, or at least was in April, because I did a show with him then. And he hasn’t died since then either. He’s older than dirt, and as liberal as ever, but still alive.
Comment by Katie — 8/26/2004 @ 12:30 pm
Arthur Miller, like Douglas Brinkey, just thinks he isn’t dead.
RIP Doug Brinkley 1961-1968
Comment by JonofAtlanta — 8/26/2004 @ 12:32 pm
The Times seems to have fixed the Miller correction in your link.
Comment by RoadRunner — 8/26/2004 @ 12:37 pm
The newspaper should print a correction on this. Hopefully the correction will also point out that Gardner was not present for the incidents leading to Kerry’s receipt of any of his medals or any of Kerry’s three Purple Hearts. It is important to get the full story, for context, after all.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200408240001
Comment by nonesuch — 8/26/2004 @ 12:39 pm
Regarding that poll, I looked in the dead tree version and couldn’t see the breakout of the rep/dem/inde weighting. Pinkus is pretty notorious for that bias, any ideas on the weighting they used this time?
Comment by motionview — 8/26/2004 @ 12:50 pm
He should get the Ricearoni medal for that ass wound.
Comment by Spaz — 8/26/2004 @ 1:05 pm
I didn’t make an error; that asshole pushed me.
Comment by Mick McMick — 8/26/2004 @ 1:15 pm
New revelation from the Swiftees:
The rice embedded in Kerry’s butt wasn’t from enema action.
Comment by Mick McMick — 8/26/2004 @ 1:16 pm
I am assuming nonesuch was being sarcastic when referring me to mediamatters for “context”. If I wanted democratic talking points from George Soros, I’d ask him for a check to help my 527 disseminate the false information.
Comment by Matt Evans — 8/26/2004 @ 1:19 pm
Keep it up Patterico!
Comment by BJ — 8/26/2004 @ 1:31 pm
Patterico’s Pontifications: Still Seeking a Correction
One of the main thrusts in the left’s attempt to discredit the Swift Boat Vets very effective attack against their tormentor has been lying about how not one of the people in Swift Boat Vets for Truth ever served with John “Cambodia in Xmas” Kerry. Tha…
Trackback by The Pink Flamingo Bar Grill — 8/26/2004 @ 1:34 pm
Like other newspapers, the LA Times is a lumbering elephant headed for the dying place. It still hasn’t registered that the blogosphere hunts down error and exposes it mercilessly.
Comment by Jerry — 8/26/2004 @ 1:37 pm
Have any of the items set forth on the Media Matters weblink that I posted been shown to be incorrect? They all have cites to the source materials, and none of the sources cited (some of which are Gardner’s own words) have been refuted. Just because you don’t like the messenger doesn’t mean the message isn’t true.
If the information Media Matters is citing is incorrect, it should be easy to disprove. If not, it should be added to the ledger as per Mr. Gardner’s credibility. The readers can make their own decisions, based on the entirety of the evidence.
Comment by nonesuch — 8/26/2004 @ 1:44 pm
More Swirling Confusion
Patterico is trying to get the LA Times to admit that they screwed up. On a front page story. Of “intense national interest.” Screwing over conservatives.
Coincidence? Let’s take a walk down memory lane -
Remember this?
Trackback by The Fladen Experience — 8/26/2004 @ 1:45 pm
Haven’t you figured it out? John Kerry does not fall down. The liberal press does not print an error.
Comment by Aaron's Rantblog — 8/26/2004 @ 1:45 pm
I just received word back from one of the authors that a correction will appear in tomorrow’s paper. Here is the correspondance so far:
Date: August 26, 2004 1:55:41 PM PDT
Subject: RE: Correction for factual error in article
From: Matea.Gold@latimes.com
To: jim@jperry.net
We are running a correction tomorrow, and my apologes for not getting it done sooner. It’s been a very hectic week. The story should have stated that none of the veterans in the ad served on Kerry’s boat. As you said, Mr. Gardner, who was a member of Kerry’s crew, is a member of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
Thanks for your interest.
Original Message
From: Jim Perry [mailto:jim@jperry.net]
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 4:49 PM
To: matea.gold@latimes.com; Patrick.McMahon@latimes.com;
maria.laganga@latimes.com
Subject: Correction for factual error in article
I am writing to determine if a correction has been publicized for the
article “Kerry starts firing back at critics of war record” published
on 8/20/2004 and still available online
(http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-
swiftboat20aug20,1,6036561.story?coll=la-headlines-nation)
In this article the writers claim “None of the men in the Swift boat
group behind the anti-Kerry ad, including Thurlow, served on Kerry’s
patrol boat during the war.” This is factually incorrect as Steve
Gardner served directly under Lt. Kerry, on his boat, and is a member
of the Swift Boats Veterans for Truth organization. In fact Mr. Gardner
claims to have served longer under Kerry’s command than any of the
shipmates who support Kerry.
This is a significant error of fact that has been allowed to stand for
6 days according to your corrections page, which lists numerous
corrections but none for this article.
Please advise me of the status of this correction. Do you have facts
which support your assertion - i.e. that either Steve Gardner did not
serve on Lt. Kerry’s boat or that he is not “in the Swift boat group”?
If not why has the correction not been issued in a timely and
appropriately manner?
Sincerely,
Jim Perry
Fillmore, CA
Comment by Jim Perry — 8/26/2004 @ 2:04 pm
Nonesuch,
You realize it is possible to evaluate the extent of someone’s injury without witnessing it happening. If Kerry said that he lost an arm in Vietnam, would we have to take his word for it because we weren’t there?
Think, man, think.
Comment by Chris — 8/26/2004 @ 2:34 pm
When is the SBVT ad #3 staring Steve Gardner to be released? I thought it was tomorrow. Interesting timing.
Comment by julie — 8/26/2004 @ 2:52 pm
“The harder you squeeze, the more systems will slip through your fingers.”
– Princess Leia
Or for you more serious types, how about this one: “The internet has detected the mainstream media’s censorship and routed around it.”
Comment by Princess Leia — 8/26/2004 @ 3:12 pm
Was Gardner present when the incidents happened for which Kerry was awarded medals? I can see how he can dispute the Cambodia issue, but did he have first-hand knowledge of the other matters?
Comment by Joel Thomas — 8/26/2004 @ 4:44 pm
When witnesses to, say, the Bronze Star events come forward, the Left tries to change the issue, saying “None of the Swifties were on Kerry’s boat!”
When that claim is shown to be not just irrelevant (just because they weren’t on the same boat doesn’t mean they weren’t on another boat in visual range) but a lie (since the single person who served longest with Kerry on the boats is one of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth) the Left tries to change the issue, saying “He wasn’t there for the medal incidents!”
If Kerry’s defenders would make the correct, nuanced defenses to begin with, instead of opening with baseless rhetoric, it would save all of us time and them credibility.
Comment by Warmongering Lunatic — 8/26/2004 @ 5:40 pm
Joel:
I believe the answer is no. But he is getting ready to dispute the Cambodia incident in a TV commercial.
Comment by Patterico — 8/26/2004 @ 6:19 pm
Maybe they’ll print a retraction when they see Swiftvets ad #3? Nah!
Comment by Jim Brady — 8/26/2004 @ 6:27 pm
It was the Republican side that spread the idea that Gardner was an eyewitness, and thus “proof” that Kerry was lying about his medals.
The swift boat vet folks should have stuck to two matters: Cambodia and Kerry’s anti-war statements.
The Cambodia matter seems to be a problem for Kerry.
As to Kerry’s testimony, whether atrocities were widespread is interpreted differently. To some, that means that most veterans committed them. To me, the charge means that a significant number of the military committed them in numerous places and times, but not that it was routine. The Pentagon thwarted any real investigation into most of the claims, so we’ll perhaps never get a comprehensive picture. But I’ve talked to quite a number of Vietnam vets who said they witnessed fellow troops engaged in atrocities.
To my knowledge, George Bush has never retracted his lie that the vast majority of his tax cuts were for the lower income brackets. Nor has he admitted that his administration falsified budget numbers on the prescription drug battle.
Somehow, Kerry must be purer than snow, but Bush gets a pass.
The fact is that both sides have tried to blur some of the issues with respect to Kerry’s Vietnam service.
I still question whether George Bush really did show up for National Guard service, but I don’t claim that he is “unfit to command.”
Kerry has the support of several high-ranking retired military officers. I respect their judgment that Kerry can be trusted. Others are welcome to decide differently.
More than 20 years ago, my right foot was badly crushed and mangled in a military training accident. There were three witnesses, all recalling somewhat different versions of what transpired. But no, I’m not going to sign a release of my military records to prove that I didn’t intentionally cause my injury. (Some, though not the majority, of the swift boat vet folks, do claim that Kerry injured himself on purpose.)
Comment by Joel Thomas — 8/26/2004 @ 6:50 pm
It was the Republican side that spread the idea that Gardner was an eyewitness, and thus “proof” that Kerry was lying about his medals.
The swift boat vet folks should have stuck to two matters: Cambodia and Kerry’s anti-war statements.
The Cambodia matter seems to be a problem for Kerry.
As to Kerry’s testimony, whether atrocities were widespread is interpreted differently. To some, that means that most veterans committed them. To me, the charge means that a significant number of the military committed them in numerous places and times, but not that it was routine. The Pentagon thwarted any real investigation into most of the claims, so we’ll perhaps never get a comprehensive picture. But I’ve talked to quite a number of Vietnam vets who said they witnessed fellow troops engaged in atrocities.
To my knowledge, George Bush has never retracted his lie that the vast majority of his tax cuts were for the lower income brackets. Nor has he admitted that his administration falsified budget numbers on the prescription drug battle.
Somehow, Kerry must be purer than snow, but Bush gets a pass.
The fact is that both sides have tried to blur some of the issues with respect to Kerry’s Vietnam service.
I still question whether George Bush really did show up for National Guard service, but I don’t claim that he is “unfit to command.”
Kerry has the support of several high-ranking retired military officers. I respect their judgment that Kerry can be trusted. Others are welcome to decide differently.
More than 20 years ago, my right foot was badly crushed and mangled in a military training accident. There were three witnesses, all recalling somewhat different versions of what transpired. But no, I’m not going to sign a release of my military records to prove that I didn’t intentionally cause my injury. (Some, though not the majority, of the swift boat vet folks, do claim that Kerry injured himself on purpose.)
Comment by Joel Thomas — 8/26/2004 @ 6:51 pm
Sorry for the double post. I got a “page cannot be displayed message.” Usually when I get those the post didn’t take.
Comment by Joel Thomas — 8/26/2004 @ 6:53 pm
Lambert/Lambeau Field: Does Kerry have SwiftVets on the brain?
The Jackson County (OR) Mail Tribune scoops Newsweek and the world on Robert Lambert’s statement that Kerry was under fire while rescuing Rassmann; meanwhile CBS can’t fathom why Kerry would say “Lambert (instead of Lambeau) Field” while in Green Bay.
Trackback by BeldarBlog — 8/26/2004 @ 7:34 pm
Lambert/Lambeau Field: Does Kerry have SwiftVets on the brain?
The Jackson County (OR) Mail Tribune scoops Newsweek and the world on Robert Lambert’s statement that Kerry was under fire while rescuing Rassmann; meanwhile CBS can’t fathom why Kerry would say “Lambert (instead of Lambeau) Field” while in Green Bay.
Trackback by BeldarBlog — 8/26/2004 @ 7:39 pm
BELDARBLOG READS
JOHN KERRY’S MIND. And does an in-your-face bit of score-keeping in the war between bogusity and truth, big media and the blogosphere: Blogosphere to Newsweek: If the Navy citations…
Trackback by PRESTOPUNDIT -- "Kerry in Cambodia" Wall-to-Wall Coverage — 8/26/2004 @ 8:32 pm
Wow. We’re discussing splinters in the arm, rice in the butt, fantasy trips to Cambodia and wild man M-60 gunners with respect to a candidate for president. Don’t you just love how totally insane life can be? All of this gives me the perfect solution for the war on terror: Bush should win the election and send Kerry on his swift boat to beach it on bin Laden’s cave with Gardner manning the guns and Rassman falling off in the nearest puddle. Meanwhile Bush can sear this into our minds by telling us that there are no swift boats on bin Laden’s mountain. Oh, yeah, Brinkley can go along to help Kerry write his journal in the best possible light and also write up those glowing after-action reports.
Comment by Joe Richardson — 8/27/2004 @ 5:54 am
Patterico SCORES!
Yeah!
(Okay, well, actually, I made up that last sentence. One step at a time, one step at a time.)
Congratulations, Patterico!
Comment by Beldar — 8/27/2004 @ 6:15 am
“Somehow, Kerry must be purer than snow, but Bush gets a pass.”
No, not purer than snow. Just not a self agrandizing serial liar.
Bush gets a pass? This has been debated endlessly, and the Dems have gotten almost unlimited media face time to do it. This is an honest disagreement about policy effects, not a fabrication of heroism.
Look at the responses of the candidates to adversity. When Terry McAuliff called Bush a “deserter” on national TV (I watched it live.)Bush did not respond by whining about “They are attacking me !!!” He released his records and let the chips fall. If you still have doubts that Bush attended the required drills, it’s because you don’t understand, nor apparently want to understand, how the Air National Guard works. (I spent 6 years in the ANG, and I find nothing at all unusual about it.)Not because he wouldn’t let you see the records.
If John Kerry wants to run for the highest office in the land based on his record, we have a right to see that record. Military, Senate Intelligence Committe attendance, etc.
The elephant in the room is that it is becoming increasingly clear to me that John Kerry wrote every commendation for John Kerry. I invite him to prove me wrong.
As another poster said “It is important to get the full story, for context, after all.”
I agree. When the press says, “They were not on the same boat” or somesuch, shouldn’t they also point out that the despite the narrow truth of that statement, the men slept together, ate together, and operated in groups of 2 to 5 boats (as in the Bronze Star incident) on a river about 50 meters wide.
Shouldn’t they point out that the SF officer who supports Kerry’s version of events, by his own words, admits he was under water for almost the entire action? and that every other officer and enlisted man in the flotilla who was still concious contradict Kerry’s version ?
Shouldn’t Edwards add “from a self inflicted wound, which he fraudulently used to put himself up for a Purple Heart” when he says “This is a man who still carries a piece of shrapnel in his leg.” ?
Oh yes, for someone who “was present” at a medal incident, and “was on the same boat” see Robert Novak’s column today.
Lump it with Garvey (the rest of his story points out other fabrications by Kerry), Kerry’s Cambodia tale, the Magic Hat, his own journal, Kerry’s “appropriation” of an action that happened before he took command of boat 44 in his book, the attack on Bush’s National Guard service that is still up on Kerry’s official website, Kerry’s unfortunate choice in dishonest advisers, and much much more, and you have what Issac Asimov used to call the gravity effect to explain black holes. As the mass accumulates, gravity - the weakest of all the natural forces - overwhelms all the others.
I’m sorry your foot was injured in the service of our country, but you are not asking me to give you the keys to the nation.
If I am wrong (it could happen)Kerry can shut me up forever by releasing his records and proving it.
Comment by Steve Raines — 8/27/2004 @ 8:49 am
Joel, I haven’t heard anyone, save Chris Matthews, arguing that Kerry injured himself intentionally. The question is whether he earned his first Purple Heart or not, or whether he even had any business requesting it. Apparently, he didn’t.
Here’s a question for all Kerry supporters who are still pushing the Bush was AWOL theory. Is it really worse for an air reservist to briefly go AWOL while the war is winding down and a glut on pilots exists than it is for a sailor on active duty to fudge a Purple Heart in order to get out of active duty in Vietnam while the war is in full swing?
Comment by Xrlq — 8/27/2004 @ 9:37 am
Bear Flagger Brings Times to Knees
The big news of the week, though you won’t see it on the National Networks, is that the Los Angeles Times has surrendered on the field of Political Battle. To a tenacious member of the Bear Flag League ( it…
Trackback by Sneakeasy's Joint — 8/27/2004 @ 11:17 am
Xrlq,
I think both sides have been about equally responsible for diverting the campaign from today’s issues. Bush doesn’t want to have to talk about Iraq, Kerry is insecure about his Senate record. Thus, we get these “gates.”
Steve,
As to “getting a pass” I was writing of conservatives toward Bush. Each side tends to give its own candidate a pass.
The Cambodia incident can probably be proved or disproved. I don’t think the medal matters, or Bush’s guard service, can be definitively decided. My view is that it is up to those making accusations to prove them, not to the accused to disprove them.
Comment by Joel Thomas — 8/27/2004 @ 11:28 am
Holy Crap! Nonesuch was spot on! You think whoever wrote the retraction read this post (and the comments!)?
Comment by Chris — 8/27/2004 @ 12:07 pm
locomotion
Comment by lyre — 11/17/2004 @ 1:13 pm
locomotion
Comment by lyre — 11/17/2004 @ 1:14 pm
Hi, you - heard of Pacific Poker?
Comment by Pacific Poker — 1/11/2005 @ 10:08 am