Sunday, October 02, 2005

Veni, Vidi, Vici

Congrats to Don Luskin, and the Krugman Truth Squad, myself included. After 3 pseudo corrections on Krugman's 2000 election story, the NY Times finally, not only issued an accurate correction but implemented a more stringent corrections policy. The story even got linked on the Drudgereport. It is pretty sad when issuing a simple correction becomes an excrutiatingly painful exercise, and speaks volumes to the integrity (or lack thereof) of its columnists.


In describing the results of the ballot study by the group led by The Miami Herald in his column of Aug. 26, Paul Krugman relied on the Herald report, which listed only three hypothetical statewide recounts, two of which went to Al Gore. There was, however, a fourth recount, which would have gone to George W. Bush. In this case, the two stricter-standard recounts went to Mr. Bush. A later study, by a group that included The New York Times, used two methods to count ballots: relying on the judgment of a majority of those examining each ballot, or requiring unanimity. Mr. Gore lost one hypothetical recount on the unanimity basis.

One can't help but notice, but even after 4 separate corrections, the Times still can't bring itself to utter the words "President Bush" or "Bush won" and can only manage a weak "Mr. Bush" and "Mr. Gore lost one hypothetical recount...."