We all know how teachers (the unionized ones, at least) felt about going back to the classroom in the fall. In New York City, teachers marched with prop caskets in tow to protest a return to in-person schooling. Teachers in Iowa wrote their own obituaries and sent them to the governor. “I feel like a sacrificial lamb,” wrote one teacher to NBC News. More than 650 teachers called in sick in Idaho’s largest school district.
So, are teachers essential workers like “some black woman” who restocks the grocery shelves for Joe Biden? Or not?
Corey DeAngelis, director of school choice for the Reason Foundation, reports Monday that he finally got a response to his request for a correction in the Washington Post. No, WaPo isn’t issuing a correction for claiming that teachers are appearing in disproportionate numbers of COVID-19 obituaries.
15 days later, Washington Post just responded to my request for a correction.
They do not agree that claiming teachers are disproportionately represented in COVID-19 obituaries (without any evidence) warrants a correction.
— Corey A. DeAngelis (@DeAngelisCorey) October 26, 2020
It was clearly the writer’s subjective interpretation; wasn’t that obvious?
The editor claims that this sentence "makes clear that this is his subjective interpretation based in his own reading of obituaries, not a representation of scientific research."
Wow. pic.twitter.com/uDu7fyrcta
— Corey A. DeAngelis (@DeAngelisCorey) October 26, 2020
The Washington Post editor's full response: pic.twitter.com/EI8aIHeuNp
— Corey A. DeAngelis (@DeAngelisCorey) October 26, 2020
“Dana’s full sentence …” Oh man, is this Dana Milbank? Explains a lot.
Recommended
Interesting. Numbers themselves are now open to "subjective" interpretation. Not the analysis of numbers and the meaning that results. The numbers themselves laid bare are subjective.
That's a hot take on arithmetic!
— Derek James From (@derekjamesfrom) October 26, 2020
Your tweet has a disproportionate number of "j"s in it. At least that's the pattern I'm seeing.
— thom (@thomroethke) October 26, 2020
Amazing – not too long ago the WaPo was a paper that even if one disagreed with the editorial page could be counted on for some real journalism..that’s done.
— BMF (@Lafcurve) October 26, 2020
Could have sworn Twitter said they would label misinformation as such. ?
— BloodSpite (@BloodSpite) October 26, 2020
Horrendous.
— Calmer than you are (@1100RS) October 26, 2020
Check out this clever trick:
The link in “obituaries” goes to this author’s prior article, includes obit-like accounts of 6 [cherry-picked?] Covid victims—4 are teachers. So in referencing HIS OWN article where he decided to list 4 teachers who have died recently vs 2 non-teachers, it is disproportionate.
— Spen Cer (@SpenThom) October 26, 2020
The statement in the article is that teachers are showing up in obituaries disproportionately. Not that they’re dying disproportionately. So much wiggle room he’s created plus linking his own article. As @michaelmalice says, corporate press is factual but not truthful
— Spen Cer (@SpenThom) October 26, 2020
They could’ve saved time and just sent you a gif. pic.twitter.com/hyx0ssgyFO
— Dan Cotter (@TheDanCotter) October 26, 2020
Seriously; where in that sentence does it suggest that the numbers of teachers appearing in COVID-19 obituaries aren’t from some study but are just the writer’s “subjective interpretation”? The fact that we wrote that it’s “striking”? Really?
Related:
No way: Analysis shows school closings linked to teachers unions and politics, not safety https://t.co/1KnpWcdIME
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) August 19, 2020
Join the conversation as a VIP Member