Kinda like ground hog day, I'll just copy what I wrote this morning:"Six weeks is six weeks folks. I can hear K-Lo now, I NEVER got those e-mails, what e-mails? They accepted lies as the truth and knew it and did nothing until they were caught. Trying to weasel out of this by using the "well we responded as soon as we got caught" line is pathetic. Take the lumps you bastards. Slime is slime and it has stuck to you principled stooges, hope you wear it well. What a suprise , she never got the e-mails, huh?
Nichevo
· 2 years ago
1) Yes, the bad, misconfigured, whatever 'tank@nro' or whatever email was FAIL.
2) However, this is no contract. Public SMTP email is unreliable. Hell, I often can't get mails through to @yahoo.com addys. And try getting some accountability between domains! Don't hold your breath.
3) There is such a thing as Return Receipt. Didn't? FAIL.
4) I think I would presume that tank@nro would go to the author Smith. If you don't go to the author, or do and get no reply, you go over his head to the editor. When did they email k-lo@nro? Didn't? FAIL.
5) Fly-Man, your pharmacist called, he's got your new meds in the extra strength. Actually I think he tried to email you...
6) Unfortunately, this just reinforces the classic stereotype of Marines, i.e. "Tell it to the Marines." I would like to read his redraft of the story, composed as a reconnaisance report to his superior officer on the eve of battle. Then I presume we would learn the difference between what he saw and what he heard. I also raise an eyebrow at deeming any AK carrier "heavily armed." That's just "armed." "Heavily" would suggest lots of ammo; rifle and pistol and bayonet and grenades; crew-served weaps; RPGs; etc. AKs are like candy over there.
7) Have I mentioned you are quite repellent, Fly-Man? Go buzz around Foer's trashcan.
Christoph
· 2 years ago
"As one listener commented in the webchat, it's rude to have an e-mail posted for a writer or editor that doesn't work."
That was I and I'll go do far as to say it's unethical. Any organization giving its customers false contact information to send complaints, compliments, or queries to is just disturbing. I've written several times to not just writers, but companies and people of a broad stripe.
That the false contact info given should be specifically the Tank's email address and he is also the writer who submitted these false stories and whom Kathryn Jean Lopez said today as I heard with my own two ears she believes is truthful and honest... raises questions not only about Kathryn Jean Lopez's judgment, but also about why his email address didn't work. IF it didn't work. However, readers just have to take their word on this, apparently.
captained
· 2 years ago
Christoph, hope you didn't mind that I didn't use your handle, but thanks for expanding on your thoughts here in the comments. As I said in the webchat, I think your skepticism is fair.
Christoph
· 2 years ago
During the interview, I started out on her side, you'll remember, Ed. Listening to Kathryn Jean Lopez say how she believes Smith intended to be and is honest and truthful before she completed her investigation quickly caused me to question her judgment and veracity.
Thomas Smith, Jr. ends his long explanation thus:
"I assure anyone reading me that I am constantly verifying, never assuming, often distrusting — not because I’m a good guy, but because I owe that to my readers, and because my honesty — no matter my opinion — will always protect me."
You as a talk show host and blogger express serious doubts about Smith's explanation. What does it say about Lopez when she says she believes the explanation and truthfulness of the person using the self-serving cock and bull language above?
LadyLogician
· 2 years ago
Now I'm confused....was there an editor or not? On one hand you make it sound like there was no editorial control ("Smith did not just get to post his submissions without editorial review, but Kathryn felt that the process lacked enough control.") and on the other there was one ("I got the sense that Kathryn wants to do the right thing by everyone involved -- Smith, the editor, and the readers."). I gave Christoph a lot of grief for obsessing on the editors name, but seeing this maybe I was wrong - maybe it is necessary to clear up that confusion!
LL
captained
· 2 years ago
Yes, there was an editor, who did not exercise sufficient editorial control. I get the feeling that the editor was somewhat disengaged, given Smith's proximity to the stories.
"I don’t doubt the honesty of the clean-up effort, but when [referring to Smith] you’ve got five books to your credit and have written for more than two-dozen media outlets, work as an editor yourself, and teach journalism, you do not qualify as “inexperienced” and you should not need a lot of supervision."
Any organization giving its customers false contact information to send complaints, compliments, or queries to is just disturbing.
Do you know this to be a willful act of deceit in this case? Or perhaps a misconfigured e-mail address?
John
· 2 years ago
In reading the blog posts in question, I noted that the author closed with: "Time to eat, sleep." It's an attempt to portray an austere existence, to make the reader feel that his world is so rough and tumble that he only has time for the basics of survival.
This sent my bullshit detector off immediately. People that attempt to be unduly dramatic in their writings are trying to affect the reader, and if an unrealistic portrayal of their living conditions or day-to-day existence are fair game, why not other aspects of their writings, like say, facts?
hadsil
· 2 years ago
It is always said that the cover-up that is worse than the crime. NRO is not covering up the crime. The stain of the crime is there as is its nature, but it's just a black eye, not paint on the carpet. Recovery is in process. So far the outlook is good. Forgiveness is possible.
hcq
· 2 years ago
Wherefore "Kathryn," when you refer to every other individual by surname? The reader's left with the impression your approval of Lopez's handling of this matter is colored by your friendship with her.
Joe
· 2 years ago
This is a chance for NRO to show the right way to vet a story that may have gone wrong, unlike The New Republic's butt covering "investigation." Obviously you wan to do this before the story runs, but if questions are raised you have to immediately reverify. Personally I think Smith crossed a line here. Reporters can be complete retrobates (and often are), but the one sin they cannot commit is reporting the story inaccurately. Smith got way too wrapped up to be objective. Perhaps it was not intentional, but it was certainly sloppy and his reporting was reckless.
NRO also needs to fix its emails.
the Fly-Man
· 2 years ago
I don't give a rat's ass about whether it's Bull shit coming from the right or the Left. Arguing about nuances in War reporting is like discussing the economy or the weather, the facts are never quite crystal clear. However, when the death sentence is given to the Left for their atrocious behavior the same crime perpetrated by the Right somehow becomes a minor misdemeanor and excusable. Ineptness over malice you say, I'd disagree. I love the way Rick Moran waxes nostalgically In HINDSIGHT,how Smith's reporting had raised his eyebrows. He remembered at the time, thinking.... More self serving bull shit.
OmegaPaladin
· 2 years ago
Fly-Man: Buzz off. STB slandered his fellow soldiers, and pulled off a perfect propaganda piece for anti-soldier left. The piece hit at all the right buttons: women, children, and pets. If WTS was comparable, the heavily armed Hezbollah soldiers would have held a public execution of a female member of the Cedar movemnt, and he would have found the body of a child after the "incursion" whihc he "knew" was killed by Hezbollah.
The stonewalling by Foer is also not comparable to what K-Lo did. If K-lo had stood by the story for months, acknowledging the questions but denying them and outright attacking her critics, then you might have a point. You remind of the Republicans who compared Bill Clinton to Nixon.
Finally, the right wing is now expected to perfect like the flyman. NRO couldn't make a simple mistake with emails - after all, all of the mighty flyman's emails always go through. Rick Moran couldn't have possibly dismissed concerns that WTS's reporting was off somehow. After all, the mighty flyman always emails a media source as soon as he thinks something is odd about the reporting.
Seriously, there are comparative levels of wrong - stealing isn't the same as murder. It is rational to argue that NRO made less of a mistake than TNR.
Jamey
· 2 years ago
Lopez should lose her job. She deliberately buried a false story.
Some CBS News producer lost her job because of some right-wing ragegasm. Now it's time for someone on the right to fall on their sword.
nitpicker
· 2 years ago
You left out the fact that, when challenged, K-Lo turned to racism to defend her claim, writing, "As one of our sources put it: 'The Arab tendency to lie and exaggerate about enemies is alive and well...'"
Even if such a statement were reprehensible, it doesn't excuse the fact the incredulous/unbelievable/propagandistic Mr. Smith reported information that was utterly false.
TinkleToes
· 2 years ago
Mitchell Prothero and Chris Albritton claim they both e-mailed NRO in October with their challenges to the story. However, Albritton used the e-mail for The Tank, not NRO's editors; Prothero may or may not have done the same, but Lopez got neither of them, nor did any of the other editors.
Re-checking all email addresses is of course a wise measure, but critics claiming NRO ignored this matter based on no response to 2 emails is equally dubious. What? Albritton and Prothero don't have telephones? Claiming it was ignored because 2 in I'm assuming 100's, if not thousands of emails, went unnoticed or no where does not constitute ignorance without the courtesy of both mentioned to do due diligence and inquire about their emails and comment on their contents.
All Comments
What a suprise , she never got the e-mails, huh?
2) However, this is no contract. Public SMTP email is unreliable. Hell, I often can't get mails through to @yahoo.com addys. And try getting some accountability between domains! Don't hold your breath.
3) There is such a thing as Return Receipt. Didn't? FAIL.
4) I think I would presume that tank@nro would go to the author Smith. If you don't go to the author, or do and get no reply, you go over his head to the editor. When did they email k-lo@nro? Didn't? FAIL.
5) Fly-Man, your pharmacist called, he's got your new meds in the extra strength. Actually I think he tried to email you...
6) Unfortunately, this just reinforces the classic stereotype of Marines, i.e. "Tell it to the Marines." I would like to read his redraft of the story, composed as a reconnaisance report to his superior officer on the eve of battle. Then I presume we would learn the difference between what he saw and what he heard. I also raise an eyebrow at deeming any AK carrier "heavily armed." That's just "armed." "Heavily" would suggest lots of ammo; rifle and pistol and bayonet and grenades; crew-served weaps; RPGs; etc. AKs are like candy over there.
7) Have I mentioned you are quite repellent, Fly-Man? Go buzz around Foer's trashcan.
That was I and I'll go do far as to say it's unethical. Any organization giving its customers false contact information to send complaints, compliments, or queries to is just disturbing. I've written several times to not just writers, but companies and people of a broad stripe.
That the false contact info given should be specifically the Tank's email address and he is also the writer who submitted these false stories and whom Kathryn Jean Lopez said today as I heard with my own two ears she believes is truthful and honest... raises questions not only about Kathryn Jean Lopez's judgment, but also about why his email address didn't work. IF it didn't work. However, readers just have to take their word on this, apparently.
Thomas Smith, Jr. ends his long explanation thus:
You as a talk show host and blogger express serious doubts about Smith's explanation. What does it say about Lopez when she says she believes the explanation and truthfulness of the person using the self-serving cock and bull language above?
LL
LL
THIS IS THE CORRECT LINK, ALSO IN THE TRACKBACKS ABOVE.
Do you know this to be a willful act of deceit in this case? Or perhaps a misconfigured e-mail address?
This sent my bullshit detector off immediately. People that attempt to be unduly dramatic in their writings are trying to affect the reader, and if an unrealistic portrayal of their living conditions or day-to-day existence are fair game, why not other aspects of their writings, like say, facts?
NRO also needs to fix its emails.
STB slandered his fellow soldiers, and pulled off a perfect propaganda piece for anti-soldier left. The piece hit at all the right buttons: women, children, and pets. If WTS was comparable, the heavily armed Hezbollah soldiers would have held a public execution of a female member of the Cedar movemnt, and he would have found the body of a child after the "incursion" whihc he "knew" was killed by Hezbollah.
The stonewalling by Foer is also not comparable to what K-Lo did. If K-lo had stood by the story for months, acknowledging the questions but denying them and outright attacking her critics, then you might have a point. You remind of the Republicans who compared Bill Clinton to Nixon.
Finally, the right wing is now expected to perfect like the flyman. NRO couldn't make a simple mistake with emails - after all, all of the mighty flyman's emails always go through. Rick Moran couldn't have possibly dismissed concerns that WTS's reporting was off somehow. After all, the mighty flyman always emails a media source as soon as he thinks something is odd about the reporting.
Seriously, there are comparative levels of wrong - stealing isn't the same as murder. It is rational to argue that NRO made less of a mistake than TNR.
Some CBS News producer lost her job because of some right-wing ragegasm. Now it's time for someone on the right to fall on their sword.
Even if such a statement were reprehensible, it doesn't excuse the fact the incredulous/unbelievable/propagandistic Mr. Smith reported information that was utterly false.
Re-checking all email addresses is of course a wise measure, but critics claiming NRO ignored this matter based on no response to 2 emails is equally dubious. What? Albritton and Prothero don't have telephones? Claiming it was ignored because 2 in I'm assuming 100's, if not thousands of emails, went unnoticed or no where does not constitute ignorance without the courtesy of both mentioned to do due diligence and inquire about their emails and comment on their contents.