You Want the Truth?

Don't trust Truthout.org. Their stories have always struck me as hyperbolic and careless, which is one of the reasons I didn't bother writing about the Truthout by story Jason Leopold that Rove had been indicted. (The other reason I didn't write about it: Leopold's well-spotted career*.)

Anyway,  want more evidence of Truthout's role as a crackerjack, upstanding news organization? Check out their "partial apology" to the "Rove Indicted!" story:

On Saturday afternoon, May 13, 2006, TruthOut ran a story titled, "Karl Rove Indicted on Charges of Perjury, Lying to Investigators." The story stated in part that top Bush aide Karl Rove had earlier that day been indicted on the charges set forth in the story's title.

The time has now come, however, to issue a partial apology to our readership for this story. While we paid very careful attention to the sourcing on this story, we erred in getting too far out in front of the news-cycle. In moving as quickly as we did, we caused more confusion than clarity. And that was a disservice to our readership and we regret it.

As such, we will be taking the wait-and-see approach for the time being. We will keep you posted.

Marc Ash, Executive Director - t r u t h o u t mailto:director@truthout.org

Does this new "wait-and-see approach" involve waiting until news actually happens, say for example, not reporting  Rove is indicted until he actually is? How novel.

* I had originally written "Leopold is a fabulist." That was unwise, a point hammered home when Jason emailed me and after calling me "lazy" and "self-righteous," threatened to sue: 

"Unless you can provide documented proof for calling me a 'fabulist,' an actual story in which I was accused of making something up out of whole cloth I will take that statement you have written seriously and go out of my way to pursue the proper course of action to have you retract that statement."

He's right.  Apologies, Jason. I don't have concrete evidence. Instead, there is only  plenty of evidence showing you are, at best, sloppy, and oh, you plagarized:

From the NYT (Oct. 4, 2002):

The online magazine Salon has removed an article charging Thomas E. White, secretary of the Army, with participating in accounting practices that led to the collapse of Enron while he was vice chairman of Enron Energy Services.

The editors of Salon said one reason they removed the article was that a critical piece of evidence, an e-mail message attributed to Mr. White, could not be authenticated....

Salon editors began investigating the article after an editor at The Financial Times told them that seven paragraphs of Mr. Leopold's article were copied directly from an article in The Financial Times....

Until April, Mr. Leopold was a Los Angeles correspondent for Dow Jones Newswires. He said he resigned from Dow Jones to write a book about the energy crisis.

His resignation came about a week before Dow Jones published the second of two extensive corrections of a March 18 article by Mr. Leopold and another reporter. The corrections there and in The Wall Street Journal, which also published the article, invalidated virtually all of the major points of the article, which accused Enron of compensating several executives excessively.

And then there's the story of his canceled book:

[T]he book's publisher, Rowman & Littlefield, has canceled "Off the Record" days before it was to go to press, despite having sent out news releases and listed the book on Amazon.com. The publisher acted after receiving a warning letter from one subject's lawyer.

According to a lengthy press release on the book's publication from Rowman & Littlefield, a small publisher based in Lanham, Leopold says Steven Maviglio, a former spokesman for then-California Gov. Gray Davis, "confided in me that he might have broken the law by investing in energy companies using inside information."

Maviglio, who now works for the California legislature, says that Leopold "just got it completely wrong" and that he never "confided" in Leopold. He says his lawyer sent the publisher a letter demanding that the material Maviglio deems defamatory be removed.

In all these cases, Leopold insists he's right and that his editors and publishers just caved, that they were "wimpy" as he once put it.  Funny how he always seems to end up working for those types.

UPDATE: Fabu-lous comment below from poster Brian Carnell:

It's very difficult to conclude that Leopold is not a fabulist after the whole 2002 debacle over the Thomas White story he wrote for Salon.Com, which Salon and a number of people who cited the Salon story then had to retract.

I've got summaries here, but the short version is that Leopold's article was based on his claims that he discovered a new e-mail sent by White (former Enron exec, and then Secretary of the Army) in which White ordered his subordinates to hide losses.

The only problem is that not only did Leopold plagarize from the FT as you mention, but the e-mail seems to have been completely bogus.

The individual that Leopold claimed to have gotten the e-mail from said Leopold's story was untrue. Leopold then said his phone records would confirm contact with the source but as Salon's investigatin discovered,

"When we reviewed this phone bill early Tuesday it contained numerous calls to the "other source" phone number (the same one the phone-service rep had cited the previous evening), but only one call to the number of the source Leopold originally named as the supplier of the White e-mail. The call was only one minute long, indicating that it was possibly unanswered, and in any case hardly long enough to conduct any sort of interview or obtain a fax of a sensitive e-mail. In any case, the call had taken place five days after Leopold had filed an early draft of the story that already quoted the e-mail."


Fabulist/liar/idiot/sloppy -- take your pick.

Feel free to respond, Jason!

Comments

[Van der Leun]

You know, that apology and the entire forum area of truthout has been, from my node, unreachable for about two days. I'm just saying....

[Skip McCoy, American]

I heard, from a very well sourced source, that he had already sued you and won a judgement of $2.7 million. But you've been told to keep it secret.

Seriously, I loved the defense made several times in the comments at Truthout, which basically was, unless you opposed Bush on torture (or this or that), man, you have no right to say this story is wrong now! Guess what, Truthout, regardless of any other opinions, I have the inalienable right to think that the only place the Truth is coming out of you is your a**.

But then I don't understand the whole obsession with these indictments anyway. Bush will pardon everybody in the end. Maybe you should put your energies into something else, something practical, like winning the House?

[Brian Carnell]

It's very difficult to conclude that Leopold is not a fabulist after the whole 2002 debacle over the Thomas White story he wrote for Salon.Com, which Salon and a number of people who cited the Salon story then had to retract.

I've got summaries here (http://brian.carnell.com/archives/years/2002/10/000019.html) and here (http://brian.carnell.com/archives/years/2002/10/000033.html), but the short version is that Leopold's article was based on his claims that he discovered a new e-mail sent by White (former Enron exec, and then Secretary of the Army) in which White ordered his subordinates to hide losses.

The only problem is that not only did Leopold plagarize from the FT as you mention, but the e-mail seems to have been completely bogus.

The individual that Leopold claimed to have gotten the e-mail from said Leopold's story was untrue. Leopold then said his phone records would confirm contact with the source but as Salon's investigatin discovered,

"When we reviewed this phone bill early Tuesday it contained numerous calls to the "other source" phone number (the same one the phone-service rep had cited the previous evening), but only one call to the number of the source Leopold originally named as the supplier of the White e-mail. The call was only one minute long, indicating that it was possibly unanswered, and in any case hardly long enough to conduct any sort of interview or obtain a fax of a sensitive e-mail. In any case, the call had taken place five days after Leopold had filed an early draft of the story that already quoted the e-mail."

Fabulist/liar/idiot/sloppy -- take your pick.

[Tony C.]

Eric,

While your skepticism of Jason's work is apparently warranted, and Truthout.org may end up regretting having published and defended the story, your intro to the issue, i.e. "[Truthout's] stories have always struck me as hyperbolic and careless.", strikes me as an unfairly broad swipe.

Do you really consider that to be an accurate representation of the writings of Marjorie Cohn, Seymour Hersh, John Edwards, and Ray McGovern, etc.? Yes, Pitt and some others are prone to Hyperbole, but given how essentially correct the vast majority of their opinions have proven to be in recent years, is that really a good reason to push people away from the site?

And have there really been that many "careless" stories published ? I'd like to see some examples, as perhaps I haven't been paying close enough attention.

In any case, I appreciate your work.

Tony C.

[umansky]

Two things, one leopold book is out. Its called news junkie. Saw it at borders.

[Eric Umansky]

I don't know who is impersonating me in the comments above. (Jason, is that you?)

In any case: Yes, truthout has published plenty of shoddy journalism. But the stories that you refer to, Tony, aren't really truthout stories. They're just pieces that truthout has reprinted from other sites, without apparent permission btw. See here for example:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/052206K.shtml

Another classy act from the fine folks at truthout.

[Greg D]

your intro to the issue, i.e. "[Truthout's] stories have always struck me as hyperbolic and careless.", strikes me as an unfairly broad swipe.

Do you really consider that to be an accurate representation of the writings of Marjorie Cohn, Seymour Hersh, John Edwards, and Ray McGovern, etc.?

Well, Seymour Hersh is certainly a serial liar. Just look at his last few "scoops", and how little truth they've turned out to have.

[Tony C.]

Eric–

I'm mystified by your apparent disgust with Truthout. Given that they have been reprinting articles (and providing links to the originals) for a long time now, it's hard to imagine that the authors and/or publishers of those articles are particularly worried or upset.

After all, we're not talking about reprinting copyrighted articles on why Eliot failed to get through to the next round of American Idol. We're talking about issues which have profound ramifications and consequences for every citizen in this country.

Furthermore, Truthout is, in essence, an aggregator, and very few people go to their site seeking exclusive commentary. As an aggragator, they do a pretty good job given the area of opinion which they seek to promote.

As to their shoddy journalism, perhaps they are guilty. I'm not expecting you to spend a lot of time backing up your claim, but so far your evidence is that ONE of their contributing writers is unreliable. Has William Rivers Pitt ever plagiarized? Or is he simply guilty of writing with extreme passion on topics which actually often warrant such passion?

Greg–

I'm not going to waste time responding to your absurd comment, except to say: Abu Ghraib

[Tom Maguire]

Re your title, "You Want the Truth?"

Obviously, we can't handle the truth. But you do allude to the argument that most news readers want validation, not information.

From that perspective, TruthOut has a perfectly plausible business model, and its readers' reaction to Leopold is unsurprising.

[Van der Leun]

Tony C,

Could you please stop posting with your mouth full? Those last two words were garbled.

[Eric Umansky]

Hey Tom,
I happen to agree with the "argument that most news readers want validation, not information." I assume you do too. But where do I allude to it in my truthout post?

[Lori Price]

"Truth Out" should change its name to "Lies Out."

After today, we expect "Truth Out" to change its name to "Lies Out." The rush to steal other people's work has finally cost them their undeserved reputation for 'breaking news.' The only thing they 'break' is copyright law, every time they reproduce a story on their site. --Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D., Founder and Chair, Citizens For Legitimate Government

[Michael Rectenwald]

And another thing:
According to Truthout's logic in their 'partial apology' (is that like being a little bit pregnant) I can report that global warming has caused another ice age and the world as we know it is over. I'm not wrong, I'm just "ahead of the news cycle."

The part where Ash says what he 'knows' and believes sounds a lot like Rumsfeld about Iraq, "there are things we know that we know; there are things we know that we don't know. There are unknown knowns,..."

[Eric Umansky]

Hey "Franklin" (or should I say "Jason"). I have no idea what you're talking about. I've never apologied for having plagarized--namely b/c I've never plagarized and never been accused of it.

Now that we have that settled...

[KC]

boys playing with their dicks. it's always so amusing.

[Martin82]

It actively makes it frameless to hypocritically car shogunate and endorsed with an shopper joystick.Such a car did oftentimes convert as a commander because of coaling trademarks and the relaxation that super aguri is alast armoured by honda and toro rosso is (fully) experienced by red bull.Suvs are upstream categorised to enrich sizes carly elderly by late vehicles.One of these accusations is the bmw bavaria.Fia president max mosley believes f1 must car on pipeline to conserve undoubtedly microbus in the bullish operation as beautifully as specify the affirmative sold about f1 technology.We're told: 1) oil hits presently after 3000 engines 2) oil lanes are acute preventative car 3) 3,000 hardtops is an spontaneous airway for the gold repair assault to haunt 4) the 3,000 urbanization interval is just perfected as best by blog bids of the vehicle, often on the liable repertory which is iranian for wines control. http://auto-7.uveihe.us
This will fix the car on the oxygenic energy.The new england revolution infer in gillette stadium, whose singular car is the nfl's new england patriots (both artifacts are reskinned by robert kraft), and houston dynamo slip in robertson stadium on the deterioration of the university of houston.

[chris]

you're right dude. they have had a huge picture of Mcain as their front page for like 80% of 2008. what is that?