But the thing is, Daisey?s supposed stories always set off my spidey sense ? one guy claiming things that no one else was claiming or reporting, all uncovered during a single six-day trip to China by a man who doesn?t speak Chinese and with no prior investigative reporting experience. Ends up my spidey sense was right: Daisey made it up. --John Gruber--
Props to Ira Glass and the rest of his team on This American Life for delivering a full-episode-length retraction. That's professionalism.
Have you ever listened to Ira Glass? I would not call him a journalist or a sober minded professional. He is an entertainer pretending to be a journalist, he got caught going beyond the pale this time. It won't be the last time he attempts to go beyond, his show is based on it.
From listening to his interview with Terri Gross on Fresh Air over NPR, author and NYTimes reporter Charles Duhigg really strikes me as another fabulist. His so called reporting is full of straw men, NEVER does he credit any of his supposed sources, he relies on anecdotes alone. Per wit, he claims to have lost twelve pounds in three months just by skipping one cookie a day; he claims that an executive from Target had to apologize to the father of a pregnant teen for having sent her advertising material relating to her condition, without naming the parties involved; he claims to have spoken to a fair labor representative who couldn't tell him her name but told him that Foxconn hid underage workers prior to inspection. The B.S. was so thick I could smell it right over the interwebs. Charles Duhigg is today's Judith Miller, the NYTimes should be ashamed to have anything to do with him. Wonder when they'll get around to retracting his Apple stories.
I saw Daisy perform "The Last Cargo Cult" at Wooley Mammoth Theater in Washington, DC. He had a gimmick where the ushers passed out American dollars of different denominations. I got a 20, my wife a five. I found the performance interesting for the most part, but extremely self-aggrandizing. At the end, he tied in a moral about the money, and then begged for it back. I didn't find his rational convincing. However, since he was so concerned about the tribe in question, and so passionate about their plight, I tried to talk to him about it. Turns out, he never did any follow-up, and had no idea how the islanders fared at present, nor did he seem to care. It was a major turn off. So much so that when Wooley Mammoth brought him back with "The Agony and Ecstasy of Steve Jobs," I decided not to renew our subscription for that season.
When I really go upset was when Bill Mahr, of HBO's Real Time, was exalting Daisy at the top of the show for his hard-hitting exposé of Apple's Foxconn assembly practices. It really lowered Mahr in my estimation. I knew in my heart Daisy was a big phony (and I mean BIG), and this verification just made my day.
this American Life's Excuses for their Flub is Weak.
They call they themselves a premier news outlet and they used an 'actor' as a 'source'. That should have set up GREAT BIG red flags at once and the story should never have aired but Apple was too big a target for ratings.
Would they have interviewed thriller writers and use what they say as 'FACTS' for espionage, crime or stories on international relations? American Life's next big story on U.S response to the current SYRIA CRISIS will be based on "JAMES BOND".
This American Life works incredibly hard to dot every i and cross every t. This story pales in comparison to the show they did on a particular juvenile judge taking the law in her own hands last year. Serious lawsuits were threatened toward them but they held their ground and their research and reporting in that case was airtight in spite of claims made by opposing lawyers.
Didn't listen to this show. It seemed like the kind of dumb thing that doesn't amuse me, and I was surprised even scheduled it. But Glass has had my utmost respect for many years and I trust that whatever decisions made by him and his staff have been the right ones in light of whatever has happened.
A lot of the regulars on here said weeks ago that this guy's word wasn't worth shit... and yet, how many people continued to use the Mike Daisy vid to prove their point about terrible working conditions at Foxconn.
I think I'll go back and find a few famous quotes...
this American Life's Excuses for their Flub is Weak.
They call they themselves a premier news outlet and they used an 'actor' as a 'source'. That should have set up GREAT BIG red flags at once and the story should never have aired but Apple was too big a target for ratings.
Would they have interviewed thriller writers and use what they say as 'FACTS' for espionage, crime or stories on international relations? American Life's next big story on U.S response to the current SYRIA CRISIS will be based on "JAMES BOND".
I think you're confusing This American Life with NPR. This American Life is a program that airs on National Public Radio, which also airs (among other things) news and current events programs. I don't think I've ever heard NPR describe itself as a "premier news outlet", although I'm sure they have standards of journalistic integrity for the news programs they air.
However, This American Life is not a news program. It's a quirky little slice of life documentary/interview program, as filtered through the sensibilities of Ira Glass. They're interested in the varieties of human experience, not in "reporting facts."
The problem they have now is akin to a magazine or internet presence like, say, McSweeny's (a quirky SF based quarterly and website) having published an interview with someone claiming to have seen terrible things in a slaughterhouse. The point of such an interview, in such a publication, is less to blow the lid off the slaughterhouse racket than to explore issues around our relationship to food, or get to know the interviewee and how he came to become passionate about such things, or ruminate on the way modern life insulates us from the sources of our convenience. It's the difference between a literary and journalistic approach to the material.
So in apologizing and retracting, they're making more of an esthetic distinction than a journalistic one. They're saying the larger issues raised or explored in the original piece are malformed (while of course regretting having been a party to disseminating falsehoods). Knowing TAL, they'll turn the retraction episode into a meditation on how trust is formed, what it means to fail in public, the nature of "truth" in these modern times, etc.
I realize this might strike some people as a sort of elaborate distinction without a difference, but if you've ever listened to TAL you'll realize that its entirely possible that many of the people who have appeared on the show have exaggerated, misremembered or simply fabricated their various personal stories. The difference here is that one of those stories intersected with a hot-button topic with larger world ramifications.
I am glad they took ownership. Doesn't mean I have to respect the bad work? Path also got deleted for violating my trust. They also had a nice apology.
Every news organization out there winds up publishing misleading information for one reason or another. Hell, when it comes to stories which would generate a lot of traffic and attention some of the biggest publications are willing to wear blinders just for the attention, the traffic, the advertising revenue. What those organizations don't tend to do is own up to that mistake, investigate, and work to correct it. Especially when the story in question happens to be the most popular story they have ever published in terms of viewership. The quality of This American Life aside, a willingness to get in front of something like this—to investigate and correct the errors—is exactly the sort of quality we should expect from various news organizations. It's just my opinion, but I think this sort of response is misguided.
Have you ever listened to Ira Glass? I would not call him a journalist or a sober minded professional. He is an entertainer pretending to be a journalist, he got caught going beyond the pale this time. It won't be the last time he attempts to go beyond, his show is based on it.
Frankly, it doesn't sound like you've spent much time listening to Ira Glass or "his show." Each week he begins the show with something like "This American Life brings you a story in three acts... act 1, David Sedaris on what happens when you let the dogs out... act 2...." Yup, definitely pretending to be a sober minded professional journalist.
They definitely screwed up with this episode though.
Every news organization out there winds up publishing misleading information for one reason or another. Hell, when it comes to stories which would generate a lot of traffic and attention some of the biggest publications are willing to wear blinders just for the attention, the traffic, the advertising revenue. What those organizations don't tend to do is own up to that mistake, investigate, and work to correct it. Especially when the story in question happens to be the most popular story they have ever published in terms of viewership. The quality of This American Life aside, a willingness to get in front of something like this?to investigate and correct the errors?is exactly the sort of quality we should expect from various news organizations. It's just my opinion, but I think this sort of response is misguided.
Technically, Marketplace "investigated" this. I doubt This American Life had much choice in the "getting in front of this" part. On the other hand, This American Life has definitely taken ownership of the mistake.
If any of the fabrications were material, Apple should sue him for slander.
At this point, it is important to know what is accurate and what is not. My fear is that many people see things in black or white, and will conclude that because parts were fabricated, all of it is fabricated.
What a fat fucking liar. I remember being bashed to hell when I posted that some of the things he was saying seemed suspicious and unverified. People were taking every single one of his words at face value as if it was the gospel truth, and making him up to be some hero-martyr-while-blower. What a sack of shit this despicable, self-serving, exploitative individual is. Now we see his true motivations, which I suspected all along. If he had an ounce of sincerity about his 'cause' he wouldnt have had to make shit up.
Technically, Marketplace "investigated" this. I doubt This American Life had much choice in the "getting in front of this" part. On the other hand, This American Life has definitely taken ownership of the mistake.
Ah, right. An important correction/distinction.
Still, a wide range of responses were still possible and I'm pretty reassured by the one that was chosen.
this American Life's Excuses for their Flub is Weak.
They call they themselves a premier news outlet and they used an 'actor' as a 'source'. That should have set up GREAT BIG red flags at once and the story should never have aired but Apple was too big a target for ratings.
Would they have interviewed thriller writers and use what they say as 'FACTS' for espionage, crime or stories on international relations? American Life's next big story on U.S response to the current SYRIA CRISIS will be based on "JAMES BOND".
^This^: So Glass' idea of "fact checking" is asking the actor that created and is doing the piece? How's that again?
Comments
But the thing is, Daisey?s supposed stories always set off my spidey sense ? one guy claiming things that no one else was claiming or reporting, all uncovered during a single six-day trip to China by a man who doesn?t speak Chinese and with no prior investigative reporting experience. Ends up my spidey sense was right: Daisey made it up. --John Gruber--
Props to Ira Glass and the rest of his team on This American Life for delivering a full-episode-length retraction. That's professionalism.
Have you ever listened to Ira Glass? I would not call him a journalist or a sober minded professional. He is an entertainer pretending to be a journalist, he got caught going beyond the pale this time. It won't be the last time he attempts to go beyond, his show is based on it.
When I really go upset was when Bill Mahr, of HBO's Real Time, was exalting Daisy at the top of the show for his hard-hitting exposé of Apple's Foxconn assembly practices. It really lowered Mahr in my estimation. I knew in my heart Daisy was a big phony (and I mean BIG), and this verification just made my day.
this American Life's Excuses for their Flub is Weak.
They call they themselves a premier news outlet and they used an 'actor' as a 'source'. That should have set up GREAT BIG red flags at once and the story should never have aired but Apple was too big a target for ratings.
Would they have interviewed thriller writers and use what they say as 'FACTS' for espionage, crime or stories on international relations? American Life's next big story on U.S response to the current SYRIA CRISIS will be based on "JAMES BOND".
This American Life works incredibly hard to dot every i and cross every t. This story pales in comparison to the show they did on a particular juvenile judge taking the law in her own hands last year. Serious lawsuits were threatened toward them but they held their ground and their research and reporting in that case was airtight in spite of claims made by opposing lawyers.
Didn't listen to this show. It seemed like the kind of dumb thing that doesn't amuse me, and I was surprised even scheduled it. But Glass has had my utmost respect for many years and I trust that whatever decisions made by him and his staff have been the right ones in light of whatever has happened.
I think I'll go back and find a few famous quotes...
this American Life's Excuses for their Flub is Weak.
They call they themselves a premier news outlet and they used an 'actor' as a 'source'. That should have set up GREAT BIG red flags at once and the story should never have aired but Apple was too big a target for ratings.
Would they have interviewed thriller writers and use what they say as 'FACTS' for espionage, crime or stories on international relations? American Life's next big story on U.S response to the current SYRIA CRISIS will be based on "JAMES BOND".
I think you're confusing This American Life with NPR. This American Life is a program that airs on National Public Radio, which also airs (among other things) news and current events programs. I don't think I've ever heard NPR describe itself as a "premier news outlet", although I'm sure they have standards of journalistic integrity for the news programs they air.
However, This American Life is not a news program. It's a quirky little slice of life documentary/interview program, as filtered through the sensibilities of Ira Glass. They're interested in the varieties of human experience, not in "reporting facts."
The problem they have now is akin to a magazine or internet presence like, say, McSweeny's (a quirky SF based quarterly and website) having published an interview with someone claiming to have seen terrible things in a slaughterhouse. The point of such an interview, in such a publication, is less to blow the lid off the slaughterhouse racket than to explore issues around our relationship to food, or get to know the interviewee and how he came to become passionate about such things, or ruminate on the way modern life insulates us from the sources of our convenience. It's the difference between a literary and journalistic approach to the material.
So in apologizing and retracting, they're making more of an esthetic distinction than a journalistic one. They're saying the larger issues raised or explored in the original piece are malformed (while of course regretting having been a party to disseminating falsehoods). Knowing TAL, they'll turn the retraction episode into a meditation on how trust is formed, what it means to fail in public, the nature of "truth" in these modern times, etc.
I realize this might strike some people as a sort of elaborate distinction without a difference, but if you've ever listened to TAL you'll realize that its entirely possible that many of the people who have appeared on the show have exaggerated, misremembered or simply fabricated their various personal stories. The difference here is that one of those stories intersected with a hot-button topic with larger world ramifications.
I think this guy had the same problem. [...]
I am glad they took ownership. Doesn't mean I have to respect the bad work? Path also got deleted for violating my trust. They also had a nice apology.
Every news organization out there winds up publishing misleading information for one reason or another. Hell, when it comes to stories which would generate a lot of traffic and attention some of the biggest publications are willing to wear blinders just for the attention, the traffic, the advertising revenue. What those organizations don't tend to do is own up to that mistake, investigate, and work to correct it. Especially when the story in question happens to be the most popular story they have ever published in terms of viewership. The quality of This American Life aside, a willingness to get in front of something like this—to investigate and correct the errors—is exactly the sort of quality we should expect from various news organizations. It's just my opinion, but I think this sort of response is misguided.
Have you ever listened to Ira Glass? I would not call him a journalist or a sober minded professional. He is an entertainer pretending to be a journalist, he got caught going beyond the pale this time. It won't be the last time he attempts to go beyond, his show is based on it.
Frankly, it doesn't sound like you've spent much time listening to Ira Glass or "his show." Each week he begins the show with something like "This American Life brings you a story in three acts... act 1, David Sedaris on what happens when you let the dogs out... act 2...." Yup, definitely pretending to be a sober minded professional journalist.
They definitely screwed up with this episode though.
With a face like that, I'm glad he's on radio.
Just wanted to point out that the photo is of Daisey, not Ira Glass.
This is Ira,
Every news organization out there winds up publishing misleading information for one reason or another. Hell, when it comes to stories which would generate a lot of traffic and attention some of the biggest publications are willing to wear blinders just for the attention, the traffic, the advertising revenue. What those organizations don't tend to do is own up to that mistake, investigate, and work to correct it. Especially when the story in question happens to be the most popular story they have ever published in terms of viewership. The quality of This American Life aside, a willingness to get in front of something like this?to investigate and correct the errors?is exactly the sort of quality we should expect from various news organizations. It's just my opinion, but I think this sort of response is misguided.
Technically, Marketplace "investigated" this. I doubt This American Life had much choice in the "getting in front of this" part. On the other hand, This American Life has definitely taken ownership of the mistake.
At this point, it is important to know what is accurate and what is not. My fear is that many people see things in black or white, and will conclude that because parts were fabricated, all of it is fabricated.
what's up with these fat dudes, Michael Moore, Mike Daisey, Rush Limbaugh, etc, etc?
Don't forget Woz!
Hey, now that his show is toast, maybe he can get a job at DigiTimes?
There's better pay for story-tellers at Faux News where a conservative and his money are soonest to part.
Technically, Marketplace "investigated" this. I doubt This American Life had much choice in the "getting in front of this" part. On the other hand, This American Life has definitely taken ownership of the mistake.
Ah, right. An important correction/distinction.
Still, a wide range of responses were still possible and I'm pretty reassured by the one that was chosen.
So did conditions improve at Foxconn yet?
Hey, now that his show is toast, maybe he can get a job at DigiTimes?
I guess with this fake story he earned enough to have a tonne fried chicken wings delivered to his stable every year. What would this creap need more.
this American Life's Excuses for their Flub is Weak.
They call they themselves a premier news outlet and they used an 'actor' as a 'source'. That should have set up GREAT BIG red flags at once and the story should never have aired but Apple was too big a target for ratings.
Would they have interviewed thriller writers and use what they say as 'FACTS' for espionage, crime or stories on international relations? American Life's next big story on U.S response to the current SYRIA CRISIS will be based on "JAMES BOND".
^This^: So Glass' idea of "fact checking" is asking the actor that created and is doing the piece? How's that again?
That's about as lazy and shoddy as it gets.