PolitiFact failed in that instance to dig into the definition of "Ponzi" relevant to economic theory. In economic theory it is not important whether or not deceit is used to perpetuate the financing scheme. PolitiFact, with help of an economics professor used as an expert source, assumed that deceit or fraud was necessary to the understanding of a "Ponzi scheme." The logic is apparent in this blurb from the PolitiFact website:
Note the text to the lower right: "Not without intent to deceive."
PolitiFact's use of an equivocal definition was only partly excused through reliance on expert sources. A better set of sources might have been used, and independent verification of the information would not have been difficult to accomplish.
PolitiFact Rhode Island made an error in its reporting. So what now? If the publishers of the error don't know about it then they have no moral responsibility to correct it.
Funny I should mention that (click image to enlarge).
It is reasonable to suppose based on the above visit record (along with a subsequent handful of other R.I. visits with "No referring link") that Journal staffers are aware of the criticism of the story.
Will it make a difference? I'm still waiting for the St. Petersburg Times to correct two matching mistakes it made in reporting Charlie Crist's share of Florida's public campaign financing pie.
There's a threshold below which news organizations don't really care enough about the truth to make corrections. I'm not sure what explains it. Economics? Ideology? Some combination of the two?
Is is correction time for the Journal? Or wait it out and hope nobody of note notices?
Update:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please remain on topic and keep coarse language to an absolute minimum. Comments in a language other than English will be assumed off topic.