December 11, 2007
Reason #7,453 I don't trust the MSM

This one is a bit in the weeds, but an example of when journalists get significant facts in stories I know a lot about wrong, it makes me not want to trust they stories I know less about before reading the MSM's handiwork.

Today's Seattle Times profiles a nice young lad currently competing in high school swimming. The kid won the 100 breaststroke at the 4A State Meet last year, as a freshman. That's quite a feat; he has my compliments.

The article includes a picture - available at the link - of the fellow supposedly doing breaststroke. Except he's not doing breaststroke, where the arms never exit the water. The picture shows him swimming butterfly, where both arms exit and enter the water simultaneously in the most grueling of swimming disciplines. See the 4th picture down at this blog post for a shot of the swimmer in question actually swimming breaststroke at last year's state meet. The two strokes aren't remotely the same.

And there's more. The caption says, "A long wingspan helps 6-foot-2 Garren Riechel in the breaststroke." That's hooey; a wingspan doesn't help you in that stroke (which in theory I should know since I was once an assistant swim coach at the collegiate level).

Watch a top flight swim meet like the Olympics and you'll see breaststroke is one of the few events where smaller, less long-limbed swimmers can compete without a disadvantage thanks to the kinesiology of the stroke. In contrast, the elite swimmers in freestyle and butterfly in particular are very often much bigger. On the men's side, 6'2"+ and about 200 pounds of ripped muscle is common (insert Stranger joke here), with long arms to boot, once you reach the international stage.

In short, the story has two blatant errors, which is just another piece of the puzzle in my skepticism toward the MSM. Yes, it's just a sports article. Yes, it's not even a high profile one at that. But, still, is a little accuracy too much to ask?

Posted by Eric Earling at December 11, 2007 10:02 PM | Email This
Comments
1. Eric, the caption doesn't say he's swimming the breaststroke.

But you're right, clearly this proves that the accuracy in the media is absent except for...where?

Here?

You miss-reported a caption that in fact did not say what stroke the swimmer was swimming.

Seems to me that inaccuracies abound all around.

Posted by: BA on December 11, 2007 10:13 PM
2. Any time that I read or watch a news story regarding something that I know about, (ie. a sport, hobby, or political event that I have attended ) I am blown away by the number of facts that the msm get wrong. "Don't believe anything you hear, and only half of what you see."

Posted by: Moondoggie on December 11, 2007 10:24 PM
3. So it is not just me!!! I always have the same thoughts you do when I experience something firsthand and later read about it. Sometimes it is small things, but other times major details that are just not reported on accurately.

And it is not matters of opinions that I am judging them on, but actually facts. I thought I was the only one but I guess not. The worst was the NY Times. I lived in NYC for 3.5 years and every few months would be at something that they covered. Never failed that they would get it wrong. This paper had the largest corrections section I have ever seen and it was not getting a fraction of what was wrong in that paper. It was amazing to read them because it seemed like at least once a week it was as major error where they were not just changing a small detail like "the meeting started at 3pm not 4pm" but major corrections that changed the entire meaning such as "Joe actually wants to kill babies not protect them."

Well I guess I ranted enough... I am just glad to know I am not the only one that has major issues with the MSM beyond difference in opinion.

Posted by: Travis Pahl on December 11, 2007 10:29 PM
4. BA: The caption under the the photo of the swimmer doing the butterfly said:
"A long wingspan helps 6-foot-2 Garren Riechel in the breaststroke. He is ranked No. 5 nationally in his age group in his specialty."
What is the reader to deuduce from that? That the swimmer in the photo is doing the breaststroke. Get a grip.

Posted by: katomar on December 11, 2007 10:35 PM
5. I agree completely. The way I figure, the chance is pretty slim that the news is only getting a pile of details wrong on the subjects that I am personally familiar with while being mostly correct on everything else.

Posted by: The Tim on December 11, 2007 10:52 PM
6.
Any chance to feature a picture of a male swimmer is news in Seattle's mainstream newspapers.

They long for Mark Spitz.

Posted by: John Bailo on December 11, 2007 11:09 PM
7. As Jim Miller often says, it would be better if journalists actually "commit journalism."

Instead, they are willing to trust sketchy sources and omit key details as long as it fits their pre-ordained narratives.

Posted by: Jeff B. on December 11, 2007 11:32 PM
8. It's high comedy when the newsies try to cover military stuff. It's reaching back a bit, but my favorite example was the narration accompanying footage of flight ops out of Saudi during Desert Storm:

"And here we see an F-14 [F-15, actually: no swing-wing, and there's a lot more sand around here than you typically see on an aircraft carrier] using its thruster-boosters [afterburners] as it comes in to land [take off, actually: that's why it's using its "thruster-boosters," but the real clue is that it's going up, not down]."

Or how about the Kursk, the Russian sub that went down? The Seattle Times reported that it had 100-some-odd officers and 13 sailors on board. Kinda top-heavy org chart, isn't it? Can you imagine groups of 9-10 officers standing around and arguing whose turn it is to boss someone around today?

Who needs The Onion when you have the MSM?

Posted by: TB on December 12, 2007 01:29 AM
9. Katomar, deducing what stroke the swimmer is doing based on a caption that doesn't specifically say what the swimmer is doing is probably no different than what the writer of the caption did - assumed too much.

Is the press wrong with facts frequently?

I'm sure that's true.

Do we often read into the writing more than is said?

I'm sure that's true too.

Posted by: BA on December 12, 2007 07:35 AM
10. I really like it when the cute little "guns are icky" reporteretts do a story that involves firearms. I remember a story where one claimed that the "alleged" gunman had a 25 millimeter handgun.

Posted by: Huey on December 12, 2007 08:35 AM
11. Once again, BA, get a grip. The whole point was the writer of the piece "assumed too much" rather than getting his facts straight, which is what journalists are paid to do, or used to be.

Posted by: katomar on December 12, 2007 09:06 AM
12. BA, you should stop now before you make yourself look more stupid than you already have.

Posted by: Bill H on December 12, 2007 09:11 AM
13. BA,

Ditto Bill @ 12.

Posted by: pbj on December 12, 2007 09:22 AM
14. I've worked with both the writer and the photographer connected to this story, both great guys and good journalists. My guess is that somehow the cutline or the photo got switched so that the info doesn't match up.

Posted by: MPB on December 12, 2007 09:35 AM
15. I've worked with both the writer and the photographer connected to this story, both great guys and good journalists. My guess is that somehow the cutline or the photo got switched so that the info doesn't match up. Unfortunately it would seem that the copy editor didn't catch that the mistake before it went to print.

Posted by: MPB on December 12, 2007 09:37 AM
16. We can't trust the media because they screwed up a photo in the sports section....while covering HS sports!!

OMG whatever will we do!!

Seriously Eric don't you have anything better to write about?

Posted by: Cato on December 12, 2007 10:34 AM
17. We can't trust the media because they screwed up a photo in the sports section....while covering HS sports!!


No.
The point ... pay close attention, kay? ... is that if the media screws up the facts or omits details on the things we know about then just how much trust or belief should we give them on the things we don't?

Got it?

Posted by: jimg on December 12, 2007 11:41 AM
18. MPB @ 15 makes a good point. Sometimes it's not the actual journalist who makes the mistake (although often it is). Sometimes it's the person laying out the paper, or my favorite, the person that comes up with the headlines (yes, in many papers there's a different person that comes up with the headlines based on what s/he thinks the story is about. This used to irritate me to no end when I wrote for my college paper. More than a few times the headline for one of my articles (or, even worse, editorial columns) had absolutely nothing to do with what the article was about and sometimes it was completely the opposite. Argh!

Posted by: WarmFuzzyPuppies on December 12, 2007 12:33 PM
19. This really cannot be laid at Production's door. Worked for a community newspaper, and Production lays the pages out on computer, according to what is submitted to them by editors, reporters and journalists. The caption for the piece would have been submitted, along with photo and story itself, to Production for layout. About the only way Production can affect a story is by advising they have to cut lines to accommodate inch constraints, which editorial staff then does.

Posted by: katomar on December 12, 2007 01:05 PM
20. This really cannot be laid at Production's door. Worked for a community newspaper, and Production lays out the pages on a computer, according to what is submitted by the editor, journalists, and photographers. The caption would have been submitted along with the photo and story for layout. Have not heard of Production writing captions. The only time Production would be involved in actual text is through submitting a request to editorial for it to be cut due to inch constraints, which editorial staff would then do themselves and resubmit. Most of any Production staff is too busy anyway designing ads.

Posted by: katomar on December 12, 2007 01:10 PM
21. Sorry for double post. Cancelled first one due to an error, and they both printed! :)

Posted by: katomar on December 12, 2007 01:13 PM
22. I think what everyone wants to know is what's Ron Paul's position on the breaststroke as opposed to the butterfly?

And does Obama support freestyle stroke for all?

Posted by: Edmonds Dan on December 12, 2007 03:40 PM
23. So, it seems that Opinion Journal - Best of the Web Today decided to weigh in.... and they reference a guy who talks about landlines and cell phones!

Is this a great web or what!?!!

Post-Intelligent Journalism

With their business in flux, newspapers are increasingly experimenting with new kinds of content and ways of delivering it. A case in point is the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, which last month started publishing fantasy and satire on its opinion pages.

First the fantasy, an article by one Linda Boyd urging the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney:

On Nov. 6, Rep. Dennis Kucinich introduced articles of impeachment against Vice President Dick Cheney on the floor of the House of Representatives. For one shining moment the will of the majority of Americans and the promise of this nation's founders were truly represented. . . .

Impeachment is squarely on the table, and momentum is building.

Dream on. In a letter to the editor (seventh one) responding to the Boyd piece, Russ Tibbitts of Renton, Wash., penned an amusing satire:

I am writing this in my basement with the lights off, having traveled home via a circuitous route while checking constantly to make sure I was not followed. I hope Linda Boyd is taking similar precautions, because after her courageous piece on impeaching President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, I suspect she is on their watch list.

It can only be a matter of time before those who have questioned this administration are rounded up and quieted who knows how.

If I were Boyd, I would be fearful of the possibility of being "disappeared" by Bush & Co. I have stopped using both my land-line phone and my cell phone, knowing that I am probably being monitored, and now communicate almost exclusively by carrier pigeon. Our nation cannot act soon enough to expose the crimes of this unholy cabal.

But wait. Is it possible that the P-I's editors took Boyd's piece and Tibbitts's letter seriously? Nah, nobody's that postintelligent.


"Used with permission from OpinionJournal.com, a web site from Dow Jones & Company, Inc."

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on December 12, 2007 06:24 PM
24. Edmonds Dan, good one. I'm guessing that Ron Paul has an opinion but it would be unconstitutional for him or the federal government to force that opinion onto you. Obama would allow that the freestyle would be a fresh breath of air but that is not to say that those preferring the breastroke or backstroke should be left out - just shown what they are missing.

While we are at it, Hillary is positive that the butterfly incident in the newspaper is a right-wing conspiracy to cast a shadow on her favorite, the breaststroke.

Mitt was enamored with the breastroke but now sees the advantages of the butterfly while also retaining a fondness for the freestyle.

Rudy loves the freestyle and whenever you think of the freestyle you should probably think of it as the 'freedom'style in rememberance of those victims of 9/11.

The bible doesn't mention which stroke was the favorite of Jesus, but Huckabee notes that if you pray real hard before you swim then whichever stroke is God's favorite, you will perform admirably.

McCain is not in favor of any of those strokes at all, any thing involving simulation of drowning and thrashing arms about wildly should be considered torture, and how dare you question him on this topic.

Fred Thompson, well, just as long as it's a blond bombshell doing the swimming, just give him a lazy-boy and a pair of binoculars and he'll be just fine.

Posted by: Doug on December 12, 2007 09:06 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?