Quote of the day
"In my work, I’ve spent a lot of time dragging other people’s flaws into the light. I did it because I believe that every time you point out that somebody is going wrong, you give them a chance to get it right next time and so reduce the amount of wrongdoing in the world. That’s why, although it has been a really painful process and will surely continue to be for some time, I think in the end I’ll be grateful my flaws have also been dragged into the light in this way. I would like to apologise again to my readers, my colleagues and the people hurt by my actions. I know that some of you have lost faith in my work. I will do everything I can now to regain it. I hope, after a period of retraining, you will give me the chance."
The Independent's Johann Hari comes clean and issues an apology for quote-stealing (and quote-manipulating) and maliciously editing Wikipedia entries. His contrition hasn't been swallowed by everyone, though - the Economist's Bagehot among those suggesting that Hari's crimes against journalistic standards are so severe (and so obviously wrong, regardless of a lack of training) that he should surely be sacked by the paper, rather than waved off for his stint in hack's rehab?
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
One thing that bugs me about this apology and especially the response to it is how much focus is on what Hari did wrong at a professional level – the falsification and fudging of quotes. Now, that is a serious error, but for me not as egregious and disturbing as his editing of Wikipedia entries of people he’d fallen out with. He wrote some vicious lies there indicating a nasty side to his character that for me is the more serious issue. I would have liked to have read more focus on that from people like Bagehot etc But then if there’ one things journalists love to write about its journalism.
And yes I think he should have been binned by the Indy.
The Daily Mash has it right, as always...
Jon: In Bagehot's defence, he does focus on it as an issue of character rather than professional negligence (as he says, you don't have to be a journalist, and certainly not a properly trained one, to know that stealing quotes and inserting them in place of worse/less intelligible ones is plain wrong). But you're right, the spitefulness and nastiness of some of those Wikipedia edits can't be excused in any way.
Post a Comment