# Should reporters challenge “facts” that are asserted by newsmakers they write about? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 12, 2012, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330 "2012-01-12T19:27:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/21 "2012-01-13T02:12:36Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > He talked about the view of Obama as an apologist for the United States. I realize it’s counterintuitive, but ‘apologist’ doesn’t mean ‘someone who apologizes,’ but rather ‘a person who makes a defense in speech or writing of a belief or idea.’ E.g. “C.S. Lewis was a vigorous apologist for traditional Christianity.” ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/22 "2012-01-13T02:16:19Z")
> [@MOIDALIZE](#): > > But isn’t that the very essence of journalism? If journalists are merely repeating, word for word, the factual claims that the subjects of their stories are making, isn’t that stenography or PR? Don’t you find it amazing that the NYT even had to ask? Isn’t it their job to already know this? Perhaps I’m thinking back to Judith Miller’s reporting before the Iraq War and feeling glad they’re suggesting that the answer might _not_ be “stenography.” > [@](#): > > So regardless of what Obama said, and the context in which he said it, there’s no way to determine what his actual message and intent was? We can read whatever interpretations we want into it, and they’ll all be valid? Romney is full of shit. That being said, yes, you can interpret a lot of things as apologizing or being apologetic. At that point I think the value of reporting the statement is going to be limited. > [@](#): > > “Romney was here, and he said X.” Well, was “X” a true statement? And it’s more than fair to evaluate that. But I’m pointing out that some statements don’t hold up to simple evaluation in a news story. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/23 "2012-01-13T02:18:12Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Regards, > Your Favorite Troll Knock it off. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/24 "2012-01-13T02:29:13Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > That’s well and good, but whether or not a politician is apologizing for America is not something that can be verified by checking court records - it’s just spin. But a good reporter can report the context as well as the sound bite. Look at the current snafu over Romney saying “I like being able to fire people.” It’s being used out of context by both Democrats and rival Republicans. But a good reporter would show the context of what Romney was saying: that he was talking about people being able to have a choice in their medical insurance providers. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/25 "2012-01-13T02:37:43Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > I realize it’s counterintuitive, but ‘apologist’ doesn’t mean ‘someone who apologizes,’ but rather ‘a person who makes a defense in speech or writing of a belief or idea.’ E.g. “C.S. Lewis was a vigorous apologist for traditional Christianity.” In the context of what the writer was referring too he specifically talked about Obama using the word “apology” as part of his premise. He is talking about the general feeling of many Americans that Obama is an apologist in that respect. “Obama the apologist” is already a lexicon of public opinion and will assuredly be used in the upcoming election. The writer knows this as do other writers. Here is the [same argument](http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2011/02/obamas_apology_tour.html) by another writer who also stated that the word “apology” was never used by Obama: "In none of these cases does Obama actually use a word at all similar to “apologize.” I would expect a plethora of similar opinion pieces by editors as the election cycle heats up. ---
**Author:** ![thelabdude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dc4da7/32.png) [@thelabdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelabdude)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/26 "2012-01-13T02:46:16Z")
Failure to do so has cost the news media credibility ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/27 "2012-01-13T15:33:21Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Despite the fact that Obama tried to [apologize for Hiroshima](http://abcnews.go.comblogs/politics/2011/10/japanese-government-nixed-idea-of-obama-visiting-apologizing-for-hiroshima/) It’s not a function of him actually using the word “apology” in a sentence. This is not a fact. There is no information regarding where the idea to apologize for Hiroshima came from, and no indication it came from the administration. All the wikileaks document said was that the Japanese government told our ambassador it would not be a good idea to do so, perhaps in response to speculation from anti-nuclear groups. So, if I were the NYT and reporting on **Magiver** ’s post, I think it might be a good idea to include the fact that his claim was false, no? Or should I just repeat it without pointing out the lie? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/28 "2012-01-13T15:47:10Z")
> [@MOIDALIZE](#): > > But isn’t that the very essence of journalism? If journalists are merely repeating, word for word, the factual claims that the subjects of their stories are making, isn’t that stenography or PR? Don’t you find it amazing that the NYT even had to ask? Isn’t it their job to already know this? Yes and no. Most news sources will challenge things said that are obviously not true, at least at times. But is it your contention that a reporter should not quote a politician unless he has fact checked everything in the quote? Like I said earlier, it’s simply not possible even if we’re talking about things that are black and white, much less the large grey area where there may not be a simple true/false dichotomy. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/29 "2012-01-13T15:58:13Z")
> [@MOIDALIZE](#): > > So, um…should reporters be determining the veracity of factual statements made to them as part of their stories, or is their job mainly stenography? Fear of fact-checking and editorializing has ruined mainstream media for me. I miss blatant opinions and “bias” in the media. I have long considered it their job to have opinions. I valued their opinions, since it was basically their job to be more informed than me (the wonders of specialization). The bland, parroting, “fair and balanced” media that exists now is absolutely horrible. > [@john mace](#): > > I don’t know that reporters have the resources to scrupulously analyze everything every politician says, so they’ll end up looking like they cherry pick. That seems a little excessive. Of course they’ll look like they cherry pick. They _already_ cherry pick. There is only a finite amount of time and space available for reporting what happens; now their bias is hidden behind what isn’t said, rather than out in the open for inspection. The notion that it is possible to just report events/facts/words and nothing else is fundamentally flawed. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/30 "2012-01-13T16:21:57Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Yes and no. Most news sources will challenge things said that are obviously not true, at least at times. But is it your contention that a reporter should not quote a politician unless he has fact checked everything in the quote? Like I said earlier, it’s simply not possible even if we’re talking about things that are black and white, much less the large grey area where there may not be a simple true/false dichotomy. Perhaps. But a couple of things: 1. There are a lot of things that come up in stories, over and over again, that have had their veracity challenged by people who know what they’re talking about, but rarely if ever get challenged by actual reporters. The ‘apologizing for America’ meme is a classic for-instance. At an absolute minimum, a reporter should ask for substantiation in cases like these. 2. Having a good bullshit detector is a minimum requirement for a reporter, and putting it to use is part of her job description. A reporter may not be able to check everything, but should have a good sense of what needs checking. And given the ease of Googling things these days, a reporter really can check most of what goes into his penultimate draft. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/31 "2012-01-13T16:40:16Z")
> [@MOIDALIZE](#): > > I’ll note that the examples you’re citing were put forth by NYT readers in their letters to the public editor, not from the NYT itself. And mentioned in the article as examples of the sort of thing they might want to do. > [@](#): > > And incorrect assertions of fact are incorrect assertions of fact. Even if we assume for the sake of argument that the NYT would only fact-check Republican statements, how would that excuse the speakers for being untruthful? Because of the distorted and inaccurate view that it conveys, in implying that Republicans are the only ones who are untruthful. Senator A and Senator B both give speeches. Both spin the facts in favor of their party and their position. The NYT thoroughly fact-checks Senator A and points out what they believe is being spun, but leave everything Senator B says unexamined, and simply report it verbatim. Is this good reporting? I would say No, if the goal is to push for honesty. If the goal is to benefit Senator A, then it is not reporting but advocacy. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/32 "2012-01-13T16:42:57Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > And mentioned in the article as examples of the sort of thing they might want to do. No, it isn’t. It’s a suggestion from a reader, and the bit about “The president has never used the word ‘apologize’ in a speech about U.S. policy or history” is the public editor’s interpretation of what the reader wants to see - not a comment about what the paper should do. It’s a setup for the open-ended questions at the end of the piece. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/33 "2012-01-13T17:10:47Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > No, it isn’t. Yes it is - these are examples of what the paper might want to do if they try this sort of “fact-checking”. And unsurprisingly, both examples are anti-Republican, as I mentioned. That’s why one of the questions asked in the article - > [@](#): > > Is it possible to be objective and fair when the reporter is choosing to correct one fact over another? can be answered “Yes it’s possible, but let’s not kid ourselves that the NYT is going to be fair. Readers want us to spin everything against the GOP even harder than we do - should we?” When Clinton “apologized” to the country for his adultery and lies, he never used the words “I’m sorry”. But the NYT did not feel it necessary to point that out. This is the same thing as the Halperin memo back in 2004. ‘Both sides lie, but let’s only call one side on it, otherwise the wrong guy will win the election’. Maybe this is SOP for ABC and the NYT, but it shouldn’t be for honest reporters. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/34 "2012-01-13T17:19:45Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Yes it is - these are examples of what the paper might want to do if they try this sort of “fact-checking”. And unsurprisingly, both examples are anti-Republican, as I mentioned. Two Times readers sent letters asking the paper to take a harder line against perceived Republican falsehoods while reporting them. The public editor used those letters as a jumping off point to ask how readers want the paper to handle claims made by politicians. Conclusion: the Times hates Republicans. Got it. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/35 "2012-01-13T17:24:21Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > That’s why one of the questions asked in the article - can be answered "Yes it’s possible… This seems too-easily accepted without proof. I don’t think it is possible in the slightest. In fact I think the assumption that it is possible is the ultimate reason why anti-bias-in-the-media folks never cease, even after mainstream news has been totally crippled by such pressure. In order to represent balanced views, one must already have an opinion on what the overall opinion-climate is. But this begs the question, because how does one determine this without bias? It isn’t like politicians are taking principled stands on the existence or non-existence of photons, whether unmeasurable sets are a good thing in mathematics, or somesuch. They’re discussing things like heath care and taxation. ---
**Author:** ![diggerwam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/919ad9/32.png) [@diggerwam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/diggerwam)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/36 "2012-01-13T17:24:27Z")
If they don’t then papers might as well publish PR releases and get rid of reporters altogether. ---
**Author:** ![CJJ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecc23a/32.png) [@CJJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CJJ)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/37 "2012-01-13T17:52:42Z")
Let’s debate this with a clearer example. During the Meet the Press debate, Romney was asked about how social programs/entitlements would need to change in the age of austerity. In his answer he said the following: [QUOTE=Mitt Romney] “What unfortunately happens is, with all the multiplicity of federal programs, you have massive overhead with government bureaucrats in Washington administering all these programs. Very little of the money that’s actually needed by those that really need help, those that can’t care for themselves, actually reaches them." [/quote] This isn’t just spin, it’s patently untrue–I say patently because anyone who pays attention to (i.e. reports on) these programs knows that [91 to 99 percent of total federal spending on these programs reaches beneficiaries in the form of benefits or services](http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3655). It’s a basic fact that I would expect a reporter covering the federal budget and its major outlays to know pretty much instantly, and given it’s prevalence in the Republican primary I’d expect any political reporter to either know it as well or at least be smart enough to check it with a colleague who covers the budget. In short, this is a fact, not an opinion, but a fact that flies in the face of the narrative Romney wants to spin. If a reporter writing about Romney’s response inserts this fact into the body of the story, it’s more than just a correction–it calls into question the candidate’s entire narrative. Should this be allowed, or is it fairer to isolate such corrections to the opinion page? ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/38 "2012-01-13T18:05:29Z")
Honestly, that people want less information from their newspapers is kind of baffiling. If I want to find out what Mitt Romney or Obama has to say, I’m sure their campaigns have website full of speeches and unchallenged assertions. If a candidate says a program suffers from massive overhead, I want a paper that can tell me the actual overhead. They don’t even need to call it a “lie” if they’re uncomfortable with that, just say the overhead is however many percent and the reader can decide if that counts as “massive”. But a paper thats just a verbatim reporting of who said what and where is pointless. Its basically just a bunch of press-releases reprinted on crappier paper. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/39 "2012-01-13T18:32:34Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > When Clinton “apologized” to the country for his adultery and lies, he never used the words “I’m sorry”. But the NYT did not feel it necessary to point that out. Well, you can point to that Clinton speech as evidence that he apologized for his affair with Lewinsky, right? I think that’s fair enough. Now, what can you point to as evidence of remotely similar quality that Obama has gone around apologizing for America? Best we’ve got in this thread is something Obama didn’t ever actually say or do, but allegedly might’ve done if things had happened differently. Got any instances where he said anything that could have reasonably been interpreted as an apology? Please share - as Ross Perot once said, “I’m all ears!” ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2012, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330/40 "2012-01-13T19:19:00Z")
> [@](#): > > [@RTFirefly](#): > > Well, you can point to that Clinton speech as evidence that he apologized for his affair with Lewinsky, right? I think that’s fair enough. > > Now, what can you point to as evidence of remotely similar quality that Obama has gone around apologizing for America? Best we’ve got in this thread is something Obama didn’t ever actually say or do, but allegedly might’ve done if things had happened differently. > > Got any instances where he said anything that could have reasonably been interpreted as an apology? Please share - as Ross Perot once said, “I’m all ears!” > [@](#): > > So we must be honest with ourselves. In recent years we’ve allowed our Alliance to drift. I know that there have been honest disagreements over policy, but we also know that there’s something more that has crept into our relationship. In America, there’s a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive. France April 3, 2009 > [@](#): > > Our moral authority is derived from the fact that generations of our citizens have fought and bled to uphold these values in our nations and others. And that’s why we can never sacrifice them for expedience’s sake. That’s why I’ve ordered the closing of the detention center in Guantanamo Bay. That’s why I can stand here today and say without equivocation or exception that the United States of America does not and will not torture. > > In dealing with terrorism, we can’t lose sight of our values and who we are. That’s why I closed Guantanamo. That’s why I made very clear that we will not engage in certain interrogation practices. I don’t believe that there is a contradiction between our security and our values. And when you start sacrificing your values, when you lose yourself, then over the long term that will make you less secure. France April 3. 2009 > [@](#): > > My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy. We sometimes make mistakes. We have not been perfect. But if you look at the track record, as you say, America was not born as a colonial power, and that the same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago, there’s no reason why we can’t restore that. Al Arabiya Jan 27, 2009 > [@](#): > > All of us must now renew the common stake that we have in one another. I know that promises of partnership have gone unfulfilled in the past, and that trust has to be earned over time. While the United States has done much to promote peace and prosperity in the hemisphere, we have at times been disengaged, and at times we sought to dictate our terms. But I pledge to you that we seek an equal partnership. There is no senior partner and junior partner in our relations; there is simply engagement based on mutual respect and common interests and shared values. So I’m here to launch a new chapter of engagement that will be sustained throughout my administration. > > The United States will be willing to acknowledge past errors where those errors have been made. summit of the americas, april 17, 2009 > [@](#): > > Too often, the United States has not pursued and sustained engagement with our neighbors. We have been too easily distracted by other priorities, and have failed to see that our own progress is tied directly to progress throughout the Americas. My Administration is committed to the promise of a new day. We will renew and sustain a broader partnership between the United States and the hemisphere on behalf of our common prosperity and our common security. Editorial April 6, 2009 Five examples of his saying that American has been wrong and will start doing better, which is an apology. All of them just from the first six months of this term. We await Rufus T’s apology. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-reporters-challenge-facts-that-are-asserted-by-newsmakers-they-write-about/609330.md?page=3)