Editor: ‘I’m Embarrassed’ I Published Bachmann’s Lying Column
Editor: ‘I’m Embarrassed’ I Published Bachmann’s Lying Column
Despite refusing to run a correction, the opinion page editor of the Minneapolis Star Tribune is now “embarrassed” he published a GOP lie about energy reform without checking it first. On April 8, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), a notorious global warming denier, attacked green economy legislation in the Minneapolis Star Tribune, claiming that “cap and trade” is really “cap and tax”:
According to an analysis by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the average American household could expect its yearly energy bill to increase by $3,128 per year.
This was a flat lie, as a letter to the editor published the very next day by the Star Tribune pointed out. In fact, Bachmann’s lie had been debunked publicly by MIT’s John Reilly with Politifact.com on Tuesday, March 24th. On April 1st, ThinkProgress published a letter from Reilly to the Republican leadership denouncing the fabricated figure.
Eric Ringham, the opinion page editor of the Minneapolis Star Tribune, recognizes now that the MIT lie was fully debunked before the column was submitted by Bachmann:
It wasn’t on my radar. I’m embarrassed to have let it go unchallenged.
In an interview with the Wonk Room, Ringham explained his decision to run Bachmann’s column without checking its veracity, despite her record of extreme anti-environmentalism and promotion of conspiracy theories about international finance and Islamic terrorism. With both the limited resources he has and the role of the opinion page as a forum for argument, he argued it is “an uncomfortable role” for an op-ed editor to run corrections after a column’s publication. “I’m not equipped – or really inclined – to go, after the fact, probing someone’s assertions.”
Ringham does try to do some fact-checking ahead of time: “What we do is check the facts that smell. This one didn’t to me.” He considers the strongly worded letter to the editor as a sufficient response, because: “The best remedy to offensive speech is more speech.” The policy that he follows as an opinion page editor is that “sunlight is the best disinfectant.”
“You can rest assured this study is never going to be represented in the paper again,” Ringham concluded, “without confirmation it’s being accurately portrayed.”
On April 10th, the Star Tribune reported on Bachmann’s anti-cap-and-trade forum without noting she had lied in its own pages that same week.
16 Responses to “Editor: ‘I’m Embarrassed’ I Published Bachmann’s Lying Column”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Wonk RoomContact Us
Donate
Isn’t that how it’s done? First, someone (Bachman) lies. Next, a stenographer (Star & Tribune) uncritically prints that lie. Lastly, only upon being called on it does the stenographer offer a weak apology.
Now that the lie is in print, some number of people will believe it, and deniers can point to it.
Of all the problems in this country, the main stream media is #1 in my book. They are nothing more than the propaganda wing of the ruling elite, interested in one thing, maintaining the status quo.
April 14th, 2009 at 4:14 pmYou are so funny. Cap and Trade is an energy tax. If it was not a tax then the government would not be projecting future income.
What are the facts:
The WSJ reported that a WH staffer told them that the project income was closer to 1.9 trillion.
The cost will be passed on to the consumer.
The U.S. Census Bureau estimates there will be 115 households.
The time period in question is 2012 to 2017, 5 years.
Doing the math:
$1900000/115= $16,521 per family, which works out to $3,304 per year. (removed the last six zeros from both sides)
Conclusion:
Yep, he was way off in his facts, he was short $176 per year.
April 14th, 2009 at 5:07 pmThis issue is more or less about sloppy reporting/editing. Let’s face it, in news media, you have to be careful. The beautiful thing about freedom of the press is that just about anyone can send their opinions and ideas to a paper, post them on the net, blaze them through the air–and people just need to pay close attention to what is happening and sift through all of that carefully, especially when these opinions are being published. Well, the editor of the Star Tribune was not careful and did not check the facts. So, David Fox I understand your frustration with the major media, but not everyone is as sloppy. Now Vernon, who is the “he” in you last line there? I hope that’s a typo, because I’m quite sure that Michele Bachmann is a woman. Also, where are your facts from, if I may ask?
April 14th, 2009 at 5:35 pmNo? Try the New York Times, and two articles written by George Will on this EXACT SAME SUBJECT. No retraction from them either.
April 14th, 2009 at 8:42 pmThis isn’t the first time the Star-Tribune has published a Bachmann lie and refused to correct it. Nor, I am sure, will it be the last. This shell of a newspaper is little more than a regurgitator of press releases when it comes to political coverage. Sadly, it is the highest circulation paper in the state, and no matter how many good blogs are out there exposing Bachmann’s lies on a daily basis, they don’t come close to reaching the number of Bachmann’s constituents that this rag does.
April 14th, 2009 at 8:47 pmAs a reader of the Star tribune, the story on April 10th was far more egregious than the OpEd.
Everyone knows that Bachmann is a loon, so they read her occasional screeds with that filter.
But the stenographer-style reporting of the Bachmann community forum was lazy and the paper’s news editors should be far more embarrassed by it.
April 15th, 2009 at 1:28 amYep, it was a typo.
But when looking at the numbers, I made a mistake. Sorry about that. While I hate to admit I was wrong it was over 7 years not 5 and the correct annual cost to a household is $2,360 per year.
Sources:
April 15th, 2009 at 10:40 amhttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB123733423766063691.html
U.S. Census Bureau
I wouldn’t worry, Eric (Ringham). Your Minneapolis Star Tribune published so many lies during the last ten years that one more lie really doesn’t make much difference.
April 15th, 2009 at 10:55 amVernon is mistaking the size of the market to the cost per household. The size of the market is actually proportional to the size of the tax cut each household could receive under cap-and-trade — about $2000 – $4500, depending on how large the market is.
The cost per household is about 1/10th the size of the market.
Not surprisingly, making calculations about the effect of a cap and trade system is a little more complicated than taking two numbers and dividing them.
April 15th, 2009 at 11:17 amBrad is wrong.
The cost of cap and trade is going to be passed to consumers, just like every other business tax or business cost is.
April 15th, 2009 at 11:40 amVernon, dude, really. Just quit while you’re, uh, well, just quit. Did the following sentence just totally pass you by: “now that the lie is in print, some number of people will believe it.” Like raaaa-aiii-iiin on your wedding day, it’s like … y’all just really don’t get it, do you? I know, I know, tell me about those $72/hour autoworkers again…I love that one, especially when my crazy uncle tells it, the one with the faded, 70s-era Buy American sticker on his truck. It’s a freee-eee ride…
April 15th, 2009 at 6:29 pmVernon voids his own argument. He says cap and trade is a tax. But then he admits it is a business cost that is passed on to the consumer. Increased business costs are not a tax idiot. I guess when oil speculators drove up the price of gas to $4 that was a tax too. I don’t remember the conservatives calling it that. And I have a business and not all business costs are passed on to the consumer. Utilities are profitable companies. They can always absorb the extra costs and make a little less profit, so don’t blame the government. Blame people like yourself Vernon who have prevented anything from being done. Utilities could have done something to reduce carbon emissions long ago as they replaced plant equipment, the way the 1970 clean air act was designed. But the conservatives prevented that from happening.
April 15th, 2009 at 7:28 pmJames G,
If you had any understanding of business you would know that taxes are business expenses. You want to play word games but the fact is that the government is going to removed via cap and trade $2306 from each household per year.
My is you oil example a truely stupid one. The government did raise part of the 4 dollar price though TAXES but the fact that oil hit 150 dollars per barrel was not done though government action, so no it was not a tax. Try to at least have examples that match the subject, namely that cap and trade is a tax on households.
April 16th, 2009 at 8:38 amjsacto,
If you had any understanding you would know that there is almost no difference in the hourly rate between union and non-union workers. The difference is the benefits which do push the total cost per worker in a union shop up to ~69 dollar range. The non-union shop benefits are much less so the cost runs around ~50 per worker. The big difference is non-union shops use the 401K business model for retirement while the union shops have a funded retirement plan.
So please, if your going to play games, get you facts right.
April 16th, 2009 at 8:43 amI find all this argument about tax or not a tax rather magical.
Magical because like the magician waving his left hand – while the right does the magic – we have the polluters screaming about ‘tax’ while they poison our children.
It is early in the morning and I am not yet awake but even in this stupor I know that one can’t place a value on the child ‘who never was’ because the mother-to-be could not face the reality of raising a child damaged by mercury laden fish.
Nor the medical costs for asthmatic children. Nor the loss to the maple sugar industry of NE because of Indiana’s insatiable and morally corrupt longing for cheap coal produced electricity. Nor …………. Pick one – any real cost.
But let’s stop all the ‘Magic.’ Let’s start asking the real questions and demand honest answers about the real cost of ‘cheap’ energy and gas-guzzlers.
Please People – get real.
April 18th, 2009 at 7:34 amGerald,
You must be doing some really good drugs. When has CO2 ever caused asthmatic children problems? When has CO2 ever caused mercury laden fish?
You do know this discussion is about cap and trade, you know taxing CO2, the gas you produce and what feeds plants? That is going to raise the cost of energy and indirectly everything else produced. You know, that stuff that makes no one ill at evironmental levels measured in parts per million.
So I say to you, get real!
April 20th, 2009 at 4:18 pm