I guess this is what happens when you request a correction from a conservative columnist who clearly botches the facts. They refuse the correction request and then make up more stuff. I'm not surprised. But I must say watching Chronicle columnist Debra Saunders try to explain away her mistake is rather painful/comical to watch.
Over the weekend Saunders, echoing lots of right-wing misinformation, wrote that I urged NPR to "sever its association" with Mara Liasson over her continued on-air association with Fox News. That's false. In fact, the day before Saunders' column appeared I specifically wrote that I wasn't calling for NPR to fire Liasson. I noted instead that NPR's code of ethics clearly states the network should deny her requests to appear on Fox since those appearances damage NPR's reputation.
So I requested a correction from Saunders. Her response? Behold [emphasis added]:
Boehlert posted this blog asking for the correction. In this blog, Boehlert referred to a posting that appeared on Friday, after my deadline, in which he claimed, "I never suggested NPR fire Liasson and I don't think they should. NPR could, for instance, prohibit its employees from apeparing on Fox." Translation: Get her off Fox -- and if she still refuses -- get rid of her. Ergo, the correction request is bogus.
Ergo, I' m not even sure what Saunders means. I never called for NPR to sever ties with Liasson, but I did suggest they stop her from appearing on Fox News. So from that, Saunders offers up a muddy translation in which NPR does stop Liasson but she refuses to comply. Or something. And because of that hypothetical, Saunders doesn't have to correct the mistake she printed in the SF Chronicle.
Fact: I have not urged NPR to cut ties with Liasson. Saunders claimed I did. When called on her mistake, Saunders refused to concede her error and instead concocted an imagined future scenario to justify her false claim.
Like I said Debra, stop digging.