3 ms·
Some people here are saying they shouldn't be praised for the retraction because retracting an error is merely doing what a publication should do. This is wrong
by garyrob 6y ago
Some people here are saying they shouldn't be praised for the retraction because retracting an error is merely doing what a publication should do. This is wrongheaded, because it ignores the fact that in the actual world in which we actually live, rather than a fantasy world that we would all like to live in, it's a rarity. We need much more of it than we have. Punishing the Times at the moment they do good by issuing a retraction will just encourage more publications to be in the camp that do not admit error. The cost of admitting error will be seen as too high.
That isn't to say that the Times shouldn't be held to account when errors are found by others. It should, and so should every other publication. But when they find and retract their own errors, it is absolutely wrong to punish them at that moment.
- vl 6y ago> Some people here are saying they shouldn't be praised for the retraction because retracting an error is merely doing what a publication should do. We should be praising five-year-olds for brushing their teeth, but from adults we expect it by default. And while NYT went down in quality in the last few years, let’s not treat it as if it is a five-year-old.
- kergonath 6y agoThey are still better than most of their competition, even the non-lunatic ones like Bloomberg or Forbes. We should praise the system when it works, when you have a systemic failure it's too late.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- julianmarq 6y ago> That isn't to say that the Times shouldn't be held to account when errors are found by others. It should But that's exactly what happened here. It wasn't the NYT who found the errors, unless I misread TFA. So, in your "not to say"... That's exactly what you seem to be saying.