A spate of misquotes and misattributions (4/9)

By Ben Fritz and Brendan Nyhan

Amidst the chaos of war coverage in recent weeks, there have been a number of misquotes and misattributions in the media that have gone unchallenged or spread rapidly to other sources.

The most widely cited example, noted by several bloggers, was in a New York Times front-page story on April 1. The article quoted Lt. Gen. William S. Wallace as saying "The enemy we're fighting is different from the one we war-gamed against." But a correction in the Times two days later noted that his actual quote was "The enemy we're fighting is a bit different from the one we war-gamed against," which appeared in its correct form in a March 28 Times story. The error had previously appeared in a Washington Post article that still appears on its website without correction. And in a demonstration of how quickly errors can spread through the media, especially when printed by a prestigious publication like the Times or Post, a search for the misquote on Google News reveals a wide array of publications that printed the same misquote, as Andrew Sullivan observed on his blog.

Another widely repeated Times mistake noted by Sullivan and others was its attribution of the description of the Iraqi regime as a "house of cards" to Vice President Dick Cheney (it was actually used by advisors to the Pentagon as well as senior administration officials speaking on background). This was also retracted in an embarrassing correction, but not before it was repeated in a Village Voice feature, a Miami Herald editorial, Agence France Press and Dow Jones wire stories and by Joseph Cirincione of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on National Public Radio's "Fresh Air," among others.

In a later post on his blog, though, Sullivan demonstrated his own problems with accurate citation. In a post Saturday criticizing a Times news analysis written by R.W. Apple Jr., Sullivan wrote, "This is the newspaper, remember, that once declared the Enron scandal would have more historical salience than 9/11. " The Times, however, declared no such thing. It was columnist Paul Krugman, who predicted that "in the years ahead Enron, not Sept. 11, will come to be seen as the greater turning point in U.S. society." Statements by columnists, of course, do not represent the views of the paper itself.

Sullivan is not the only writer to recently attribute views printed in a newspaper to the newspaper as a whole. In a March 11 Times profile of The Weekly Standard, a conservative magazine, Nation columnist and MSNBC blogger Eric Alterman said, "Reader for reader, [The Standard] may be the most influential publication in America." The Standard, seeking to promote this quotation without identifying its left-liberal source, featured the statement in ads promoting the magazine in its March 24 (p. 36), March 31 (p. 31) and April 7 (p. 30) issues, attributing it each time to "The New York Times," despite protests from Alterman. Obviously, a statement quoted in a news story in no way represents the views of the newspaper.

Finally, a recent piece by Joan Walsh on Salon.com had the similar problem of attributing a political advertisement to the wrong organization. In her article about criticism of presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry, D-MA, she wrote, "Republicans said Daschle's questions about Afghanistan gave 'aid and comfort to the enemy,' and the party sponsored TV ads linking the South Dakota Democrat to Saddam Hussein." The Republican Party, however, didn't sponsor the infamous ads in question, which were run by American Renewal, the legislative arm of the conservative Family Research Council. Moreover, they were print advertisements, not a television spot.

In all these examples, the mistakes may appear to be minor, but accurately quoting public figures and attributing statements to the correct organization or individual are requirements of responsible journalism. It's crucial to take the time to get the facts right because small assertions can often become the evidence for big arguments.

Update (4/14): In yesterday's Post, Ombudsman Michael Getler defended his paper's use of the quote "The enemy we're fighting is different from the one we'd war-gamed against," despite the Times correction. He stated that Post editors checked with reporter Rick Atkinson and stand behind the version they printed.

[Email this to a friend] [Subscribe to our email list]

4/9/2003 12:03:33 PM EST |

This website is copyright (c) 2001-2005 by Ben Fritz, Bryan Keefer and Brendan Nyhan. Please send letters to the editor for publication to letters@spinsanity.org and private questions or comments to feedback@spinsanity.org.

Comments by YACCS