OT: Article about niche sports retracted by The Atlantic due to false reporting
A few weeks ago, someone posted a link to the article about niche sports in The Atlantic, and many of us commented on it. Over the past few days, it's been revealed that the writer of the article, Ruth Galit Barrett, fabricated some of her facts, going so far as to fabricate one of the kids in the article. She apparently has a history of plagiarism. I picked up on this a few days ago, as The Atlantic began footnoting the article with its findings. I guess they finally just pulled the whole thing. Here's the NYT article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/01/business/media/atlantic-ruth-shalit-…
Note: I figured this was ok for OT since the article was discussed at length in a previous thread and it is about college sports.
November 1st, 2020 at 10:34 PM ^
Ruth Shalit Barrett.
The biggest thing that got her in trouble wasn't some of the dramatic touches she put on things like fencing injuries (scratches and bruises that became "massacres" and "gashes"), it was the fact she lied to the editors when they were doing follow-up on the questions the Washington Post first raised. If she hadn't done that, the article might have survived with just an editor's note.
It's too bad because the general phenomenon/culture she's describing does exist, she just couldn't resist making it even more movie-of-the-week dramatic.
November 1st, 2020 at 11:10 PM ^
Gee, when has a reporter ever done that before? Trying to turn a “7” story into a “9” on a ten point scale explained probably 1/3 of the defamation cases I saw over the years.
November 2nd, 2020 at 7:15 AM ^
Wow, Ruth Shalit. Yes she had gotten into the same mess at the New Republic. I have lots of stories I can't share, but others in the MGoCommune are plugged in there...
November 2nd, 2020 at 7:33 AM ^
My feelings exactly. Just about everything in that article tallies with I've observed directly and indirectly in that segment of society. Too bad .....
November 1st, 2020 at 10:41 PM ^
I'm not even surprised with them anymore. This is the 3rd or 4th major story they've had to 'clarify' major portions of in the last couple years?
As someone who used to read them despite being on the opposite side of the political spectrum from most of their writers, it's quite sad what a shadow of themselves they've become.
I guess editors matter.
November 1st, 2020 at 11:02 PM ^
I don't recall this magazine retracting 3 or 4 major stories recently, though I do maybe recall one other correction. I think you're conflating publications. And any publication can get fooled. Some, including this one, are just more willing to account for their mistakes. Unlike, say, Fox News.
November 2nd, 2020 at 8:31 AM ^
One story would be Trump calling military folks "losers", which was fabricated by The Atlantic. Even John Bolton, who does not like Trump at all, has said he did not hear those comments made.
These publications are laughable these days.
November 2nd, 2020 at 9:18 AM ^
That folks here would downvote this because the implications discomfit their priors.... sheesh.
November 2nd, 2020 at 9:32 AM ^
One other I can think of off the top of my head is the lady who recounted a story from her childhood in St. Louis where a police officer had shot and killed a cousin(?) and was the basis of her belief in an inherently racist country. Turns out the story is almost entirely false. Making the entire premise of the article... well, sort of hard to justify.
And considering I don't really pay that much attention to the magazine/website anymore, I'm sure there are many more instances just like this.
I like to read good long form journalism from the left, to balance what I read from the right. There are plenty of places to get that. The Atlantic hasn't been one of those places for some time.
November 2nd, 2020 at 9:39 AM ^
Actually that story was confirmed by none other than... wait for it... Fox News.
It's also pretty telling that the person to whom the remarks were directed, General Kelly--the one person who could deny it happened--has made no public comment on the story. Damning with silence.
November 2nd, 2020 at 11:25 AM ^
Right - just because one person didn't hear it - Bolton of all people - doesn't mean it didn't happen.
November 2nd, 2020 at 1:21 PM ^
If I recall no one will actually say they heard it said, only that they heard someone say it was said. Iirc, Trump has a history of thinking he is pretty smart for getting out of doing his military time, like a lot of rich folk did back then. I might not have those facts spot on, I really don't care enough to remember the details of bathroom gossip.
I'd say it's circumstantially probable he said it. Circumstantially probable gets reported in TMZ, not what was a serious journalistic outlet like The Atlantic.
November 1st, 2020 at 10:58 PM ^
She must be related to Mitch Albom.
November 2nd, 2020 at 1:06 AM ^
Worse, Wendy Shalit
November 2nd, 2020 at 7:03 AM ^
...and maybe also related to Gene?
November 2nd, 2020 at 7:18 AM ^
I read this when it came out. It was a good read. She's obviously talented and the cheating probably wasn't necessary. It's unfortunate on some level but she brought it on herself.
November 2nd, 2020 at 10:42 AM ^
She is sadly the more common theme in today’s brand of “journalism”
November 2nd, 2020 at 5:23 PM ^
She ain't great, but she's no Sabrina Rubin Erdely either.
November 2nd, 2020 at 11:27 AM ^
The media lies? I am shocked. Shocked. To hear the media lies to us.
Media needs to all go away and never come back again.
November 2nd, 2020 at 1:30 PM ^
I can't go that far. Someone needs to keep an eye on our government. That's a bunch of thieves and liars that can't be trusted with the silver if ever there was one.
We need the 4th estate. But we need the 4th estate to earn their 1st Amendment stripes back. Everyone in Washington deserves the scrutiny they've given Trump.
I'm hopeful the media realizes the only way they can keep their ratings up post-Trump is to keep finding shit wrong in Washington no matter the party, as long as it's scandalous. Keep 'em on their toes.
November 2nd, 2020 at 2:15 PM ^
I think it's unfortunate that the word 'media' is used in such a broad stroke way. There is a difference between journalism with integrity and the broader media. There are sources that still maintain credibility and integrity. That doesn't mean they never get it wrong; it just means that the foundation of their reporting is based on principles of fact-finding and truth-telling. Journalists are not the enemy, but the media at large who have an agenda may well be, whether they're on the right or left.
November 2nd, 2020 at 3:14 PM ^
It's unfortunate the 'media' has earned that broad stroke label.
If I wasn't much more terrified of the fox regulating the henhouse, I'd suggest there be a much stricter definition of what "the press" is, as far as a First Amendment definition.
November 2nd, 2020 at 11:31 AM ^
Thanks Wendy - good catch! I posted the original but didn't see this. I'm extremely bummed and annoyed- I loved that article. I found it fascinating - there was no need to dress it up. Stupid and pointless.
November 2nd, 2020 at 12:12 PM ^
This magazine has a reputagtion of being very corrupt so that does not surprise me