Ignoring contrary evidence, NY Times, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette uncritically repeated McCain accusation that Obama is "delay[ing] the World Series"
SUMMARY: The New York Times and Pittsburgh Post-Gazette uncritically reported Sen. John McCain's suggestion that Sen. Barack Obama is "delay[ing] the World Series" with his purchase of 30 minutes of network airtime to be broadcast October 29. Neither article noted that, according to the Fox executive who reportedly negotiated the ad buy, Obama's purchase of the airtime would not delay the start of the game.
Reporters Michael Cooper and Jack Healy asserted in an October 29 New York Times article that Sen. Barack Obama's purchase of 30 minutes of network airtime to be broadcast that evening is "possibly adding further delay to the rained-out fifth game of the World Series." The Times article, as well as an October 29 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article by reporter Tracie Mauriello, also uncritically reported Sen. John McCain's remark that, "No one will delay the World Series game with an infomercial when I am president." In neither case did the articles note that a Fox television executive reportedly said that Obama's purchase of the airtime would not delay the start of the World Series game scheduled to be played on October 29. Nor did either note that none of the World Series games so far have begun before 8:30 p.m., when Obama's campaign program is scheduled to end, as the Times itself noted in a separate article.
Politico's Ben Smith reported in an October 28 blog post that "[a] Fox Broadcasting executive denied that Barack Obama's half-hour ad, scheduled for tomorrow night, forced Fox and Major League Baseball to delay the start of a World Series game." Smith quoted Fox executive Joe Coppola, who according to Smith, "negotiated the ad buy," as saying: "Our first pitch for the world series is usually around 8:30 anyway -- so we didn't push back the game, it was really just about suspending the pre-game -- you know, [Fox baseball announcer] Joe Buck. ...That's all we did." Coppola continued: "By no means did they push to get us to accommodate them with Game Six. ...We're just missing the pregame, which isn't a big deal for us. It was a business decision."
Similarly, in an October 28 Times article, reporter Jim Rutenberg wrote: "(Fox executives have said that they, and not the Obama campaign, had initially asked Major League Baseball to move the start of Wednesday's game to 8:35 p.m. from 8:20, to make way for his infomercial. But as it turns out, such a delay was not necessary anyway; none of the World Series games has started before 8:30, and two started after 8:35.)"
Coppola referenced "Game Six" because that was the World Series game that was originally scheduled to be played on October 29. However, Game 5 of the World Series was suspended because of rain on October 27, and weather also prevented the resumption of Game 5 on October 28. The resumption of Game 5 is now scheduled for October 29, with Game 6, if necessary, scheduled for October 30.
From the October 29 New York Times article by Cooper and Healy:
And [McCain] mocked Mr. Obama's plans to broadcast a half-hour campaign commercial on Wednesday night, possibly adding further delay to the rained-out fifth game of the World Series. After a wet day in Philadelphia, Major League Baseball announced on Tuesday that game five, which was suspended Monday night because of bad weather, would not resume until Wednesday evening.
"By the way, no one will delay the World Series game with an infomercial when I'm president!"
From Mauriello's October 29 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article:
Mr. McCain had scheduled another event 50 miles away in Quakertown, but canceled because of the dismal weather. Major League Baseball canceled the completion of Game 5 of the World Series in Philadelphia for the same reason.
The World Series played a role at Mr. McCain's Hershey rally, as well. Mr. Obama is scheduled to deliver a televised address, paid for by his campaign, tonight.
"No one will delay the World Series game with an infomercial when I am president," Mr. McCain told the cheering crowd.
So how does it forward the conservative agenda by pointing this out? In my view it just makes McCain look idiotic for even mentioning it.
You know, MMFA, everything doesn't need to be critically analyzed by the media. Sometimes you can just put the quote out there and let people decide for themselves what to make of it.
Well said, this is ridiculous. McCain's quote makes him look petty and silly. If MMFA wants the media to take apart every single quote and point out the obvious, then they must think the public, and their readers, are second graders.
It's misinformation. It belongs here. It's a lie that being used to reinforce a meme of "elitism" that they've been propagating for months.
having read all the "with" posts on this, i have yet to see a reason why mmfa should not have covered this. think of it this way. with all the issues to report on, the n. y. times has to put this in there? it is a "with", but it's "why is this there" in print and why did someone take the time to write it. are people affected by something like this? i never cease to be astonished by some of the stupid reasons people come up with for not liking a candidate. i think mccain had an intention here of painting obama as an elitist: he doesn't care about you hard working sports fans. and assuming that everyone actually knows the whole story is a stretch. so sorry, this is here because it belongs here.
So how does it forward the conservative agenda by pointing this out?
By pointing out the fact that reporters are simple repeating the conservative misinformation without getting the facts, MMFA is showing that the Times and the Post-Gazette are both losing credibility.
"Sometimes you can just put the quote out there and let people decide for themselves what to make of it."
That would be nice. But I'll bet that at this very moment there's a sizeable percentage of Americans who believe that Obama is indeed delaying the World Series, and a smaller subset who think it's objectionable. If MMFA starts applying an "importance filter" to its stories, things like this will go completely unnoted. At least someone is mentioning it. Anyway, what inconvenience is it to you? You saw the headline, clicked on it, and then clicked again to comment, presumably having to log in and/or sign up in order to do so. Why did YOU go to all this bother just to point out something you considered trivial?
"But I'll bet that at this very moment there's a sizeable percentage of Americans who believe that Obama is indeed delaying the World Series, and a smaller subset who think it's objectionable"
You must be joking?
Are you saying there are people who when several sources are saying, "He's delaying the World Series." won't take it at face value? Are you that naive?
What Bruce seems to miss here is that he himself said people would decide for themselves. That means they can come to two different conclusions. If people think it's petty, then the misinformation is somewhat superfluous. But if they think Obama is wrong to delay the World Series, then the misinformation has some effect. How much, how many people, it's hard to say. But it's not really relevant since correcting misinformation is basic journalism, it should be done without wondering if it makes any difference or not.
"But if they think Obama is wrong to delay the World Series, then the misinformation has some effect"
Liberal paranoia gone amok...
You do know that there's a lot of people who think Obama's a Muslim, right? That's not true either, but people believe it.
You're equating this with people thinking he's a Muslim?
It's a similar type of misinformation.
Yes, some effect. I'm not saying it's going to swing the election. Again, it doesn't matter, because this is basic journalism ethics. There's no reason not to correct it, whether you personally think it's important or not.
I get paid 10 cents per post.
Your being abused then Bruce. Your worth at least a quarter/post. :)
With the nonsense that Bruce posts, my feeling is that a dime a post is way too generous.
Can anybody name the game that was delayed for McCain's acceptance speech during the republican national convention?
The Thursday night "Monday Night NFL Football" (opening game of the season)?
Second guess would be the 1927 World Series opener.
Hateful ageist !
Dammit Colonel, I damn near spit up my elitist sushi lunch after reading that!
Glad you were able to "choke it back", wouldn't won't you ruining a good shirt/jacket.
Want not won't (slap back of hand)
Hey Oscar, I'm the president of the MMFA chapter of Hateful Ageists Anonymous. I could be your sponsor if you need one.
But I might have to call my sponsor because that was funny as hell.
Would that mean I could no longer pick on those seasoned citizens in the political arena? If so, no thanks, perhaps another year.
McCain's speech delayed the start of the Giants / Redskins game in Week 1.
Well, McCain never claimed that no one would delay ANY sports event. Although I can't argue that the RNC isn't an "infomercial."
It did feature the Magic Drill-Baby-Drillbit.
Who is grasping at straws here? McCain for making a rather dumb statement? Or MMFA for trying to make him look petty?
Oscar, I don't think MMFA has to try to make McCain look petty. He does that quite well all by hisself.
True, so I guess the next question, to quote Tommy, "WITH?"
Exactly, the uncritically repeating a McCain accusation is actually doing Obama a favor.....sometimes MMFA be careful what it wishes for.
Why would correcting the accusation be changing the effect? McCain would still look petty, but he would look dishonest on top of it.
Read Bruce's post at the beginning, he said it better than I could.
I read it. I'm asking why he still wouldn't look "idiotic" if the misinformation was corrected.
Bruce can answer as well, if you're not up to the task.
If you can't grasp Bruce's post, then you are not up to the task.
How does his post address my question?
Oh for god's sake, "You know, MMFA, everything doesn't need to be critically analyzed by the media. Sometimes you can just put the quote out there and let people decide for themselves what to make of it"
Again, I read his post. That does not tell me why he would not still look idiotic if the misinformation was corrected.
I have no doubt you read it, you just don't understand it.
Please explain it, then. I'd like to see exactly how he covered that.
If you'd stop wallowing in your petty paranoia, you'd be able to figure it out for yourself, I am not spoon feeding you this, Bruce's point is obvious, sorry if you keep missing it.
You're going off the deep end awfully early today. There's no "paranoia" here.
If you can't explain it, then you can't expect it to be "obvious". It wouldn't be very difficult for you to at least make a minor effort to do so.
Anyone who thinks this ridiculous quote by McCain will have any effect is paranoid, period.
You're right, Tommy, out of the millions of people who are going to watch the game and have to wake up early in the morning for work tomorrow, none of them are going to care about staying up another half-hour.
Basic...journalism...ethics. It doesn't matter how much or how little you hypothesize the effect will be, it should still be corrected.
But if the game is not starting late as MMFA says anyway, then what do they have to care about? There is no delay, hence no backlash against Obama.
I stand by my dime store analysis of your mental state.
Because not everyone knows what time the game was supposed to start. "But if they think Obama is wrong to delay the World Series, then the misinformation has some effect. How much, how many people, it's hard to say." Quit acting as if I'm claiming this to be a huge factor or something.
What reason is there to ignore journalistic standards here?
So you're argument is that people who don't know what time the game was supposed to start will be upset because they had to stay up a half hour extra and that may drive them to McCain?
But if they don't know what time the game was supposed to start, how can they be mad.............oh never mind, lol!!
Because they were told that Obama delayed the game. Did you forget about that part, or what? It's the topic we're posting on.
I didn't say it was going to "drive them to McCain". It may just be one of those pervasive nuggets of bullcrap that keeps being dredged up every October. Correcting it now would probably help.
Again, why not point out the misinformation? It's a clear falsehood, yet there's supposed to be an argument that it shouldn't be corrected. I'm still waiting to hear that argument.
My point was that the NYT uncritically reporting McCains quote does not help McCain. It's a dumb quote in the first place.
I understood that quite well, of course. Now please tell me how pointing out the dishonesty changes that. Will people think any better of McCain when they find out it's not true?
If there's no reason to refrain from correcting it, then there's a breach of journalistic ethics. So that would be "why this is here".
I see Brabantio's point that it should have been corrected as a matter of record, but I don't believe it should have been reported on by this site.
Well, Bruce, I'm sure MMFA throughout the years have used you as a barometer of what they should and shouldn't post. You are that important.
I will admit to reading this site with more of a critical eye than 99% of the cheerleaders around here. Guilty as charged.
It's a blog with an agenda. We all know that. So what? This is misinformation that helps conservatives. It belongs here. Your objection is duly noted and put in perspective.
This site is about misinformation. This is misinformation, whether you think it will backfire or not. Remember, it's not about intent. It's not about reporters planning on this having some effect, and it won't, therefore it shouldn't be covered or whatever. They parroted a line that fits in with the "elitist" theme (he thinks he's more important than the World Series!) and so it should be noted here, whether you think it makes McCain look stupid or not.
Just a final point. Back during the Democratic primaries, when Hillary was having to go after Obama to try to gain ground in the delegate count, she made quite a few comments about Obama that painted him as unqualified ("all he's got is a speech from 2004" for example), and the media uncritically reported them.
The media uncritically reports on lots of stuff. MMFA picks and chooses which ones to mention. Why leave out the Hillary stuff which obviously painted Obama as unqualified? She gets a free pass to spread her conservative misinformation?
It's subjective. That's my point.
It wasn't conservative misinformation. Duh!
Of course it's subjective. It's a liberal site.
Many of us here (myself included) gave Hillary hell for that, for the very reason that conservatives would use it if Hillary lost. Also, I think that might fall into the realm of opinion, so it's more a question of getting an opposing view than disputing it with facts.
The argument is that since a liberal site doesn't attack a Democrat themselves, they shouldn't post about the media's failure to correct McCain's lie? That really doesn't make a lot of sense. Media reports shouldn't be subjective, as this site is.
Again, my point is that McCains lie did not advance the conservative agenda. It damaged it.
The media should have corrected the misinfo (if they knew,) but not all misinfo is conservative misinfo even if it's said by a mavericky old geezer conservative with a hot VP.
And again, it can be used against Obama in the future whether it helps McCain today or not. Your qualifier for what makes "conservative misinformation" is simply invalid.
That's conjecture and your entire argument is based on it.
I should say I appreciate the acknowledgement that the reporters in question should have corrected the falsehood, which is exactly what MMfA wants.
"Well said, this is ridiculous. McCain's quote makes him look petty and silly. If MMFA wants the media to take apart every single quote and point out the obvious, then they must think the public, and their readers, are second graders."
...and Tommy is left dangling in the wind. I knew you would be more reasonable than him.
It helps McCain if people believe it, and some low-information folks will.
Have people forgotten the lie about Clinton delaying air traffic at LAX for two hours to get a haircut? People bite into this stuff, especially if it reinforces a perception or stereotype.
The only way it helps McCain is if it nets him votes. Do you honestly believe a comment like that nets him votes?
Even if it doesn't help McCain, it would still be conservative misinformation just because it's something that can be brought up about Obama for years to come. The Clinton haircut reference should make that crystal clear.
If it doesn't help him, why on Earth would he say it, and his propaganda machine keep repeating it? Riddle me, that.
To be fair, these are the same people who picked Sarah Palin and Joe the plumber to represent the McCain camp. They are too desperate to properly analyze the effects of their actions at this point.
Very few single things can be said to be game changers. However, a campaign is a lot like a criminal trial. It's about providing bits of evidence that paint a picture. This is another meme the Cons are trying to use to paint Obama as elitist and narcissistic. It definitely belongs here.
That's exactly right, and we all remember how conservatives behaved during the Clinton administration. We have to expect they'll use every talking point they can find, including this one, should the election turn out as expected.
It's here because MMFA knows it will drive Tommy and Oscar nucking futs.
Can we coin a new term here for Tommy's WITH obsession? How about 'Relevance Troll'? It's a close cousin to the concern troll.
Don't they stop play all the time at these games for commercial breaks? Seems that I remember going to a Braves game a couple of years ago, and there were a lot of instances where nothing was happening, and somebody told me that they were waiting for a commercial break to end. I may be wrong about this, but have you ever watched a pro sports game and heard them say "This is what you missed during the commercial"? I've never seen it.
As I understand it, Obama payed the networks for this commercial, and the networks pay the MLB, and the MLB pays their players outrageous salaries. Isn't Obama just promoting capitalism?
Next:Obama tries to ban apple pie.
Right after putting the Chevy and hot dog factories under the states socialist iron fist.
Insert joke about how American automobiles are the one industry more poorly run than government bureaucracy / how one does not wish to know how hot dogs are made
He's a communist because he used to share his toys with the other kids in kindergarten.
...and to put "Mom" under Sharia law.
Outlaw dancing in Sundays.
No wait, the was Proinhibition.
Ask yourself. What's more important? State of the Nation, or Major League Baseball? I'd say the former, and not the latter.
I remember in 2003 being delayed to take off from St. Louis airport because Bush had landed to throw out the first baseball, so no flights could take off and land. We were initially told that our plane was heading back to Kansas City because it didn't have enough fuel to circle for several HOURS while Bushie had his photo op. And the secret service wouldn't tell the flight crew how long the delay would be. So that meant a lot of us would miss our connecting flights.
Finally we were able to board our original plane, an hour late. The flight crew said that it was happening all the time.
It's getting pretty whacky out there. This morning in the Boston Globe, Jeff Jacoby opined that Obama could be a deadly enemy of free speech and an incipient dictator (this because Obama, unlike some Democrats, refuses to lie down when attacked with lies and innuendo - I guess Jacoby just isn't used to an opponent who doesn't hold still while being bashed) But if anyone thinks this is a harmless jest on McCain's part, they may have forgotten the spectacular excoriation Bill Clinton endured when he allegedly delayed a commercial airline flight for his haircut. The tactic of ridiculing a candidate's supposed 'personality flaws' can be highly effective. And remember - anyone who is actually undecided at this point must surely be looking at criteria the rest of us can only guess at.
Thing is, Jacoby apparently doesn't understand what free speech is if he's opining that Obama is going to take it away from us. Last I knew, that wasn't part of the platform, you know, make laws abriding speech, and the written word. Sounds more like something up Palin's alley anyway.
Obama speaking out against people who are speaking out against him isn't suppression of speech, it's Obama using his rights to battle what he perceives as slights, or outright falsehoods.
What about Bud Selig ? Allowing FOX to dictate when the World Series starts? And playing games in driving rain storms? No McCain outrage there?
Congratulations Phillies. And it's high time the Series was moved back two weeks to get away from some of this lousy cold weather. I mean, it's late October. Football and basketball are here. The Series should be over by October 15 or 20th at the latest. And play some day games, too.
Go Obama!
The McCain campaign is going through a mental recession. You just hear this constant whining and complaining. The McCain campaign has just become a nation of whiners.