NYT Reporting [Was: Vietnam and What else Blumenthal said]

Fri May 21 15:40:58 UTC 2010

A lie is a deliberate, conscious misstatement of the truth. There is absolutely no evidence tjar what you are calling a lie was conscious or an attempt to deceive. If there is lying going on here, it is from people who are deliberately misrepresenting the nature of the utterance, though I am willing to concede that a number of them are just too ignorant of the way that language works to see the difference.

Reporting rumor without having established the foundation is shoddy journalism. It presupposes the possibility of the truth of the rumor. "When did you stop beating your wife?" presupposes the truth of the proposition that you used to beat your wife. Granted, the one is a rumor and the other is a putative fact,  but both have the effect of discrediting the object of the slander. Both are reprehensible.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: "David A. Daniel" <dad at POKERWIZ.COM>
Date:         Fri, 21 May 2010 12:02:37
To: <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [ADS-L] NYT Reporting [Was: Vietnam and What else Blumenthal
              said]

>>The fact is that he did NOT "lie."<<

We all heard him say "in Vietnam" - that was a lie.

>> akin to asking, "When did you stop beating your wife?"<<<

Nope. Akin to saying "It has been reported several times over the last 30
years or so, most recently in 2004, that Bob beats his wife. In a statement
to us, Bob said this is not true." Perfectly legit.
DAD

-----Original Message-----
From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of
ronbutters at AOL.COM
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 10:48 AM
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: NYT Reporting [Was: Vietnam and What else Blumenthal said]

Re: NYT Reporting [Was: Vietnam and What else Blumenthal said]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---

The fact is that he did NOT "lie." It is not even clear that he deceived
anyone, even unintentionally. The newspaper took a possible ambiguity and
called it a lie. That is yellow journalism. That is wrong.

As for the swimming captain bullshit, the reportage is akin to asking, "When
did you stop beating your wife?" and then pleading "I never actually accused
you of beating your wife." Again, slanderous,  irresponsible journalism.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: "David A. Daniel" <dad at POKERWIZ.COM>
Date:         Fri, 21 May 2010 10:30:58
To: <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
Subject:      [ADS-L] NYT Reporting [Was: Vietnam and What else Blumenthal
said]

The subjects of Vietnam and swimming certainly generated interesting
threads, and yet I don't really see why. Nor do I see why the NYT should be
chopping heads. It all seems pretty straight forward, to wit:

1 - The NYT said Blumenthal misrepresented his military service, and he did.
The fact that he didn't ALWAYS misrepresent it is irrelevant. As Leno put it
last night: "Now the Blumenthal campaign says he only lied four times,
that's what we're down to".

2 - The NYT said that Blumenthal was reported to have been the captain of
the Harvard swim team when he never was. In fact, it had been so reported
and, in fact, he never was captain. The NYT also said that Blumenthal told
them he had never said that and did not know how that story got started,
i.e., they published his side of it. The Hartford Courant says all the same
things as the NYT and has now published a correction of its previous reports
about Blumenthal having been captain.

3 - The NYT says there is no record that Blumenthal was ever on the swim
team. The Hartford Courant also says there is no record that he was on the
swim team, except for some pictures from his freshman year that show that he
was "at least associated" with the swim team that year. But the guy who sent
them the pictures said, "However, if Blumenthal was on the Harvard swim
team, he is not included in the team's group yearbook photo that year". The
Courant also says they found a guy who remembers Blumenthal being on the
team, year not specified. In any case "no record at the college" seems to be
correct.

Now, to the linguistically relevant part of this: The only mistake I see
from the NYT is when they said, "Records at the college show that he was
never on the team". That sounds very active and definitive, like there is
something concrete they found that indicates he was never on the team. As
editor, I would have corrected that to: "So and so at the college said there
are no records that he was ever on the team". That is a more passive
approach that puts the onus on the college rather than on the reporting. If
something pops up later, it was the college's fault. Leaves the NYT some
wiggle room.

But, since the facts were straight, no head-rolling called for that I see.
DAD

___________________________________________
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." Benjamin
Franklin

-----Original Message-----
From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of
victor steinbok
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 12:43 AM
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: What else Blumenthal said

Re: What else Blumenthal said
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---

.More proof that NYT has become an embarrassment.

ttp://bit.ly/aHysdg

Hartford Courant put the kibosh on that story as well.

To me, this is rather conclusive evidence that the NYT reporters took
oppo research from the McMahon campaign and published it virtually
unfiltered--and unchecked. Will heads roll? Doubtful. Aside from the
Blair affair, NYT has always resisted removal of screw-ups. It took
them nearly six years to rectify the WMD problem.

VS-)

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:16 PM, Dan Goodman <dsgood at iphouse.com> wrote:
>
> He's also reported to have said twice that he was captain of the Harvard
> swim team.  Which, according to reports, he was never a member of -- let
> alone captain.
>
> --
> Dan Goodman

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2885 - Release Date: 05/20/10
03:26:00

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2887 - Release Date: 05/21/10
03:26:00

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org