USA Today (routinely used by Fakebook to Fact Check) forced to delete 23 stories...

anonymoose said:
Neither I. So you consider the NYT to be not credible.
I understand. They’ve had serious problems with their credibility too.
Click to expand...

A rogue author who resigned makes them not credible? Well then I guess by your logic all of them are not credible.
 
anonymoose said:
Why do you think the USAToday editors let 23 fake news articles slip by before the NYT exposé came out?
Click to expand...

If you actually read the article, you'd know the answer.

“After receiving an external correction request, USA Today audited the reporting work of Gabriela Miranda,” the note reads. “The audit revealed that some individuals quoted were not affiliated with the organizations claimed and appeared to be fabricated. The existence of other individuals quoted could not be independently verified. In addition, some stories included quotes that should have been credited to others.”

The note added that the publication would review and strengthen its processes to prevent similar incidents in the future.

USA Today held a meeting with employees over video conference on Thursday to discuss the investigation. The meeting, led by USA Today’s editor in chief, Nicole Carroll, featured a briefing on some of the problems discovered in Ms. Miranda’s articles and a question-and-answer session.

During the investigation, USA Today concluded that Ms. Miranda took steps to deceive investigators by producing false evidence of her news gathering, including recordings of interviews, according to the person briefed on the inquiry. One of the people involved in the investigation disputed that conclusion in Thursday’s meeting with staff, saying that the people looking into her work could not verify the identities of some people in the recordings.
 
K
AProudLefty said:
If you actually read the article, you'd know the answer.

“After receiving an external correction request, USA Today audited the reporting work of Gabriela Miranda,” the note reads. “The audit revealed that some individuals quoted were not affiliated with the organizations claimed and appeared to be fabricated. The existence of other individuals quoted could not be independently verified. In addition, some stories included quotes that should have been credited to others.”

The note added that the publication would review and strengthen its processes to prevent similar incidents in the future.

USA Today held a meeting with employees over video conference on Thursday to discuss the investigation. The meeting, led by USA Today’s editor in chief, Nicole Carroll, featured a briefing on some of the problems discovered in Ms. Miranda’s articles and a question-and-answer session.

During the investigation, USA Today concluded that Ms. Miranda took steps to deceive investigators by producing false evidence of her news gathering, including recordings of interviews, according to the person briefed on the inquiry. One of the people involved in the investigation disputed that conclusion in Thursday’s meeting with staff, saying that the people looking into her work could not verify the identities of some people in the recordings.
Click to expand...
I see. So why did it take another paper to discover USA Today’s fake news? Did the NYT have information the USA Today’s editors didn’t have?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Well, I can see one of two reasons:

1. Those were the ones that slipped through and there were more the editors caught and kicked back for inaccurate quotes. Not likely, but possible.

2. The editors are "True Believers" and were in complete agreement with Miranda, and in being so couldn't see the bullshit for the dogma clouding their judgement. (highly likely)
Click to expand...

I imagine that CNN is ten times worse at least
 
Damocles said:
I followed up with one from CNN that didn't need a paid subscription, even told you that some of y'all may want to use that one. Do you not bother to read the post that you respond to, or do you just do that to me because you want me to look good?
Click to expand...

She's a daft old bat, par for the course.
 
AProudLefty said:
Yes maybe. In Spanish please.
Click to expand...

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • miranda-card-translation-in-spanish.jpg
    miranda-card-translation-in-spanish.jpg
    49.3 KB · Views: 7
AProudLefty said:
If you actually read the article, you'd know the answer.

“After receiving an external correction request, USA Today audited the reporting work of Gabriela Miranda,” the note reads. “The audit revealed that some individuals quoted were not affiliated with the organizations claimed and appeared to be fabricated. The existence of other individuals quoted could not be independently verified. In addition, some stories included quotes that should have been credited to others.”

The note added that the publication would review and strengthen its processes to prevent similar incidents in the future.

USA Today held a meeting with employees over video conference on Thursday to discuss the investigation. The meeting, led by USA Today’s editor in chief, Nicole Carroll, featured a briefing on some of the problems discovered in Ms. Miranda’s articles and a question-and-answer session.

During the investigation, USA Today concluded that Ms. Miranda took steps to deceive investigators by producing false evidence of her news gathering, including recordings of interviews, according to the person briefed on the inquiry. One of the people involved in the investigation disputed that conclusion in Thursday’s meeting with staff, saying that the people looking into her work could not verify the identities of some people in the recordings.
Click to expand...

Short version:

This liar was able to publish article after article full of shit and lies because her bosses who were supposed to double check her work didn't. The likely reason they didn't is a combination of incompetence and like-thinking. That is, to them the articles made sense, even as they were full of shit.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Short version:

This liar was able to publish article after article full of shit and lies because her bosses who were supposed to double check her work didn't. The likely reason they didn't is a combination of incompetence and like-thinking. That is, to them the articles made sense, even as they were full of shit.
Click to expand...

She deceived them. They are now working on a procedure to prevent that from happening again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top