As Twitchy reported earlier, the Associated Press made quite the correction. Initially, the AP reported that 70 percent of recent calls to the Mississippi Poison Control Center were from people who had ingested ivermectin to try to treat COVID-19. The AP later corrected its piece, noting that the actual percentage was 2 percent, not 70.
As we reported, CNN’s Jim Acosta had Dr. Anthony Fauci on over the weekend to explain that “one of the enemies of public health is disinformation,” over a chyron saying that podcaster Joe Rogan had taken a widely discredited livestock drug to treat COVID. CNN is dedicated to stamping out misinformation about COVID-19.
It’s funny, then, that CNN’s Brian Stelter retweeted a claim that it’s not media bias that makes the AP report such a wildly incorrect number; it’s the hollowing out of newsrooms. They just don’t have the staff anymore to fact-check what they publish.
How does this keep happening? A major AP correction. If only they had an extra copy editor or something 🙄 pic.twitter.com/rieyAprIrC
— Cameron Cawthorne (@Cam_Cawthorne) September 6, 2021
Here’s the retweet:
The Stelter retweet is just magnificent. #cleanuponaisle5 https://t.co/NLnUfaYajy
— David Rutz (@DavidRutz) September 6, 2021
Most of them are terrified of picking up a phone. If they can’t verify it from a web browser or by searching this hellsite, no biggie.
— Idiocracy Achievement Unlocked (@DuncanDowntown) September 6, 2021
It's all about speed to market.
— Latka (@masaharo) September 6, 2021
I'd be more willing to forgive if it wasn't constant and egregious.
— Mathew Linder (@MKillerrabbit) September 6, 2021
Nonetheless, the errors always seem to go one way.
— Mark Schouten (@MarkSchouten3) September 6, 2021
And, for some just unknown reason, the “false” stories always seem to go one way.
— HuskerFan58 (@akeece58) September 6, 2021
to get from 70% to 2% is explained better by partisan bias or raging incompetence (or both) than by "hollowed out newsrooms."
— streiff (@streiffredstate) September 6, 2021
Does a non-hollowed-out newsroom mean one staffed with non-leftists?
Simply having a larger quantity of progressive staffers doesn't mean better journalism.— Pete Kaliner (@PeteKaliner) September 6, 2021
70% and 2% are almost the same thing they are both percentages just the numbers are different.
— Andrew Johnson (@Drew242282) September 6, 2021
70% to 2% is too big of a jump. Maybe 10% either way I can understand, but it looks like they made it up.
— John Berry (@JohnnBerri) September 6, 2021
It wasn't an error. It was an intentional lie, knowing full well that a tiny percentage of readers of the original panic-porn would see the correction.
— Ken Rusnak, 16 cents richer (@KenRusnak) September 6, 2021
Funny how these mistakes exclusively lean one way.
— Don't Red Flag Me Bro (@RedFlagTraining) September 6, 2021
This game is as old as newspaper itself.
Report bullshit, correct it at a random later date in fine print on random page.
— Rick (@Rothbardian1627) September 6, 2021
Or if the person who wrote the article had a source for their claim and verified that. I don't believe that a labor shortage in the newsroom prevents a journalist from following normal protocols and acting with integrity. It is just an excuse for publishing the IVM poison meme.
— Simon Katz (@SimonKatz13) September 6, 2021
Amazing if any, even one story was produced the other way with an error
— MikeFitz (@fitz_ct) September 6, 2021
Oh! We are supposed to feel sorry for you so you because you are so shorthanded? I have watched plenty of small news organizations like @Timcast that are very capable of providing truth by making a phone call or two.
— NotYourMom (@yeshuaislord3) September 6, 2021
Maybe they used the new common core math to do the calculations and the person who wrote it wasn’t good at it. Or it could’ve been a rounding error. More likely the writer was politically biased and just made up the number to be sensational and get clicks.
— radams (@rondadams) September 6, 2021
@brianros1, the role of journalists is to check facts first before writing an article. I am sure this is 101 at journalism school. If you can’t confirm facts don’t write the article. You are an adult and you understand your role. No copy editor is going to fix this.
— Lavinder Singh (@LavinderSingh18) September 6, 2021
So…if you’re short staffed it’s okay to tell lies and publish disinformation.
— bbstacker 🇺🇸 (@CrankitLoud) September 6, 2021
What a ridiculous excuse ….. those poor media folks.
— Steve (@Steve19673318) September 6, 2021
If they’d stop piggy backing off each other’s stories (and I mean that in the literal sense because they are usually fabricated or out right made up) we wouldn’t have this problem
— Tron_Jivolta (@RockDog04) September 6, 2021
Still asking questions like this is why we’re still losing.
— Gulag Inmate 93271 🇺🇸 (@Sinnersaint39) September 6, 2021
@brianstelter likes the tweet but would he be willing to take a tiny pay cut to pay for a research staff to make him and @cnn look less foolish? Probably not.
— avacado pits (@avacado_pits) September 6, 2021
They can say whatever they want. The real reason, as we all know, is that they wanted the story to be real. It *is* directly tied to bias. It’s what they believed and the story was handed to them on a platter. Why double check when your whole being screams “it’s the truth”?
— PoliticalNumbness (@polnumbness) September 6, 2021
And you notice zero warnings of misinformation from the Twitter overlords. Those overpaid, undereducated soy boys
— MikJee (@SMikjee) September 6, 2021
So it’s not media bias, even though the errors and mistakes always seem to go one direction — it’s the poor understaffed newsrooms who don’t have copy editors to catch these blatant mistakes that should set off alarm bells.
Related:
‘Quite the correction’: AP’s percentage of ivermectin related calls to MS poison control center was just a LITTLE off https://t.co/NyurD6ULsp
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) September 6, 2021
Join the conversation as a VIP Member