We Lie Too, So Where's Our Pulitzer Prize?
EDITORIAL
The recent scandal at the New York Times has affected all of us in the journalism profession. On Sunday, May 11, the Times ran a lengthy article describing repeated acts of plagiarism and falsification by one of its reporters. The Times' story caused us here at Newshax.com to review our own practices and, sadly, we have discovered that we can screw up just like the big boys.
As a news site, we have an obligation to make up as much news as possible and poke fun at all the people we can. Sometimes, the pressure to meet deadlines results in less than adequate propaganda that doesn't portray the kind of slant and bias we are paid to portray. The following are some of the more egregious omissions and outright lies we uncovered during a full audit of past features: (more...)
On April 28, we ran a story about Saddam Hussein's birthday celebration at Chucky Cheese. The article suggested that the reporter had attended the party. This was untrue. At the time of the party, the reporter was in fact attending a bris at the home of Osama bin Laden and attended by Ariel Sharon, where apparently not much happened of interest.
On May 2, we printed a story regarding a Georgia high school's decision to limit attendance at its spring prom to people dating their cousins. The article contained quotes attributed to two students and a school official, but failed to present them in an hilarious regional dialect. We regret this omission.
On April 25, we reported that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had challenged world leaders to a cage match. Careful adherence to journalistic integrity should have required us to report that Donald Rumsfeld is Secretary of Both Offense and Defense.
On April 29, Newshax.com reported the President Bush intended to review all farm programs, beginning with Hee Haw. In fact, President Bush has all of the Hee Haw episodes committed to memory. The person assigned to review them is Colin Powell, as a punishment for not being Donald Rumsfeld..
On May 1, we published a story entitled "Hit TV Show Sued for Waste of Time." A comment from one reader indicated that the reader bought the story hook, line, and sinker. We regret that there were not more like him.
On March 19, we printed a story entitled "4 out of 5 Dentists Prefer Fondling Patients to Sugarless Gum." We should have reported that when the poll question was clarified to make explicit that the choice was between fondling patients and fondling sugarless gum, the number who preferred fondling patients dropped to 1 out of 5.
We regret these lapses. We also regret that there were not more of them and that they were not funnier. You. the reader, have our pledge that in the future we shall try to take our responsibility to be irresponsible more seriously.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Received on 2003-05-15 22:51:20
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: 2020-02-04 07:16:17 UTC