Cudos to LifeSiteNews’ valiant and, now, successful efforts to correct a so-called “reputable and credible” source like The New York Times magazine. It seems that the building momentum and outrage among El Salvador’s national press, along with LifeSiteNews’ readers and the blogosphere forced them to recant on their false abortion coverage in El Salvador.
While The Times did salvage some shred of integrity, one has to ask just what kind of credibility the general public can place in their reporting in the future or even in the past. After all, LifeSiteNews can’t cover all of their errors – especially the one’s we don’t even know about.
There is only one thing that liberal reporters hate more than social conservative views and that’s losing the credibility that they presume to have. What a cruel and self-delusional world that they live in.
Once again, hat tip to John Henry Westen and the LifeSiteNews crew. At least we have one news outlet in this country that Canadians can turn to for news items the main stream media refuses to report on.
And it also shows us that we should never, ever stop applying the pressure on our opponents when they trip up. The truth eventually vindicates us all. Sometimes it comes sooner rather than later, but one thing is for certain, it does arrive. In this case, the heat was too much even for the Goliath that is The New York Times. Five round stones or a keyboard, phone, and attitude can accomplish wonders. Don’t forget it.
By the way, the Main Stream Media Shakedown Awards is back on. I have placed this story by LifeSiteNews as the first entry in the contest.
To learn more about the contest, click here.
To learn read the entire list of reports on The New York Times debacle, click here.
NEW YORK, January 8, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Five weeks after they were notified by a LifeSiteNews.com article that they had made a grave error in reporting on abortion in El Salvador, and one week after the paper’s ombudsman published his corroboration of the LifeSiteNews.com evidence, the New York Times has issued a correction. On Sunday, the New York Times magazine issued an editor’s note admitting at least one of the errors in an April 9 story.With information from contacts in El Salvador, LifeSiteNews.com pointed out in late November that the cover article in the NYT magazine of April 9 claimed falsely that some women in El Salvador were imprisoned for thirty years for illegal abortions. LifeSiteNews published the full court ruling in the case which showed that rather than being jailed for a clandestine abortion – as the Times magazine asserted – the case study cited actually concerned infanticide of a full-term baby. (see coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jan/07010404.html )
The emotionally laden piece published by the magazine carried a photo of a young woman in prison by the name of Carmen Climaco. The caption stated she “was given 30 years for an abortion that was ruled a homicide.” Moreover, the article concluded, “She’d had a clandestine abortion at 18 weeks, not all that different from D.C.’s, something defined as absolutely legal in the United States. It’s just that she’d had an abortion in El Salvador.”
Complaints from LifeSiteNews.com readers prompted New York Times public editor (ombudsman) Byron Calame to investigate the Times magazine story in light of the court ruling. After verifying that the court ruling published by LifeSiteNews.com was authentic and did in fact contradict the assertions by the magazine, he corresponded with magazine editor and the standards editor, both of whom as of the December 31 publication of Mr. Calame’s article were refusing to admit their error and publish a correction. (see coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jan/07010208.html )
The story spread like wildfire on talk radio, blogs, and even in the mainstream press both in America and El Salvador. (http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jan/07010507.html ) There were even assertions that the paper would remove it public editor position altogether (http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jan/07010404.html )
The pro-abortion bias of the New York Times was aired to millions. Prominent attention was paid to the fact that Times Publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. gave a speech to graduates of the State University of New York at New Paltz in May 2006 where he demonstrated his extreme pro-abortion and pro-same sex ‘marriage’ militancy. In his speech he “apologized” to the graduates saying, “You weren’t supposed to be graduating into a world where we are still fighting for fundamental human rights, whether it’s the rights of immigrants to start a new life, or the rights of gays to marry; or the rights of women to choose.”
The editor’s note in the magazine’s corrections section yesterday stated: “The Times should have obtained the text of the ruling of the three-judge panel before the article was published, but did not vigorously pursue the document until details of the ruling were brought to the attention of editors in late November.”
The editor’s note adds: “Ms. Climaco was sentenced to 30 years in prison for a case that was initially thought to be an abortion but was later ruled to be a homicide; she was not given 30 years in prison for an abortion that was ruled a homicide.”
See the full editor’s note in the NYT magazine here: