Wednesday, August 19, 2009

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=1903020

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=1903020

Shared via AddThis

Monday, August 10, 2009

Toronto Star Corrects "Misquote Gone Wild"

 
  Toronto Star Corrects "Misquote Gone Wild"
August 10, 2009
 
By: Mike Fegelman, Executive Director

  View this Article Online and Discuss on Headlines and Deadlines
 
Dear HonestReporting Canada Subscriber,

It's amazing how a mishandled quote can take on a life of its own, even over a period of many years. A case in point is a "comment" falsely attributed to former Israeli Defense Forces chief of staff, Moshe Yaalon, now an Israeli cabinet minister.

The story of this bogus quote goes back to 2003. Referring to Israeli claims that it had no negotiating partner among the Palestinians, Henry Siegman, wrote in the New York Review of Books:

"This consensus has enabled Prime Minister Sharon's government to maintain that its only option is to wage an unrelenting war against the Palestinians that, in the words of the Israeli Defense Force's chief of staff, Lieutenant General Moshe Yaalon, will "sear deep into the consciousness of Palestinians that they are a defeated people" before any political process can begin."

The Siegman version of the quote was "cited" by Gary Fields (a professor of communications, no less) in the Chicago Tribune and by Toronto Star editorial page editor emeritus Haroon Siddiqui in 2004. It was picked up again in 2006 by Boston Globe columnist H.D.S. Greenway; Siegman repeated it in 2007, this time in the London Review of Books.

But the "quote" didn't get the scrutiny it deserved until last January, when Columbia professor Rashid Khalidi "cited" it in the NY Times. That's when our colleagues at CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting) raised the first red flag. CAMERA pointed out a 2002 interview where Yaalon told Haaretz (see parts one and two) something far different than what Siegman, Fields, Siddiqui and Greenway presented. Yaalon told journalist Ari Shavit:

Shavit: "Do you have a definition of victory? Is it clear to you what Israel's goal in this war is?"

Yaalon: "I defined it from the beginning of the confrontation: the very deep internalization by the Palestinians that terrorism and violence will not defeat us, will not make us fold. If that deep internalization does not exist at the end of the confrontation, we will have a strategic problem with an existential threat to Israel. If that [lesson] is not burned into the Palestinian and Arab consciousness, there will be no end to their demands of us."

Yaalon later added:

"The facts that are being determined in this confrontation -- in terms of what will be burned into the Palestinian consciousness -- are fateful. If we end the confrontation in a way that makes it clear to every Palestinian that terrorism does not lead to agreements, that will improve our strategic position."

How a quote about terror not defeating Israelis morphed into a comment that the Palestinians must be utterly defeated is still unknown. Notwithstanding, the Times and the Globe corrected their online commentaries, and the Tribune issued this correction. This past Saturday, the Toronto Star also issued an unprecedented mea culpa with Siddiqui explaining:

"The statement attributed to (Yaalon) was not just in the blogosphere but was widely quoted in mainstream, respected publications," explained Siddiqui. "There had been no correction or clarification sought or given that I was aware of. So I had no reason to think it was not a valid quote."

Appearing prominently on page two, Oakland Ross, the Star's Mideast bureau chief, commendably reported on the "Tale of a misquote gone wild." The Star gave almost 1,000 words and four column inches to ensure that their readers actually saw and read the corrective.

Additionally, the Star issued a formal correction notice immediately below Ross
' article which stated the following:

                         

Some might like to argue that the damage had already been done. Others might contend that this effort is better late than never. Either way, what
's worth taking into account is how the Toronto Star acted responsibly to remedy the erroneous content that had appeared in their pages.

How You Can Make A Difference:


W
e're more likely to criticize than to commend, but considering the Star's efforts to set the record straight on this unverified quotation which was falsely attributed to Yaalon, HonestReporting Canada asks its members to commend the Toronto Star and its Public Editor, Ms. Kathy English, for their commitment to accuracy and fairness.

Please refer to Oakland Ross' August 8 article entitled "Tale of a misquote gone wild" and the Star's August 8 correction notice. Please send letters of commendation to: publiced@thestar.ca


This communique was adapted from HonestReporting's Media Backspin blog. Click on the image below to proceed to Backspin directly.

                                     

     
 
 
   
 
 
Toronto Office: P.O. Box 6, Station Q Toronto, Ontario M4T 2L7
Montreal Office: P.O. Box 42508, Succursale Snowdon Montreal, Quebec H3W 3H7
Office: (416) 915-9157 E-mail: info@honestreporting.ca Web: www.honestreporting.ca

 

You are currently subscribed to honestreportingcanada as: pressing4truth.canada@blogger.com
Add info@honestreporting.ca to your email address book to ensure delivery
Forward to a Friend  |  Manage Subscription  |   Subscribe  |   Unsubscribe
Net Atlantic

Friday, August 7, 2009

Final Chance to Support HRC's Summer Anti-Media Bias Campaign




 

Dear Friends,

According to a recent New York Times article, Hamas has shifted from "rockets to culture war" in their goal to win popular support through "cultural initiatives and public relations." Additionally, the Globe & Mail, Canada's "paper of record," made similar statements recently claiming by some unknown veracity that Hamas is moving "towards moderation."

Are these media outlets woefully naïve or willfully ignorant?

Consider the following: If Hamas did truly adopt non-violent tactics, could the Times and the Globe please explain why only two weeks ago, two Hamas terrorists were killed while handling a bomb which was being prepared for use against Israeli forces? Could they explain why Hamas is currently digging tunnels next to UN facilities under the assumption the IDF will not target them during a future conflict? Could they explain why Hamas summer campers recently re-enacted the abduction of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit and why its charter still calls for the destruction of Israel?

Terrorist tactics are manipulating the media. That's why since 2003 HonestReporting Canada has been fighting for more balanced and accurate media coverage. We need your help now more than ever to protect Israel's image from a hostile press. Click here to make your contribution to speak up for Israel.


We can't let the media get away with this type of terrible anti-Israel bias. We must demand that the media publish stories based on facts, not Palestinian propaganda.

It's crucial that HonestReporting Canada has the resources to effectively respond, especially when such stories, at times, actually affect Israel's decision about how to safeguard its citizens.

We are
working around the clock to demand that the Canadian media get the story right. We are regularly in contact with senior editors, producers, and reporters from various Canadian media outlets to sensitize them to Israel's concerns and towards fair, accurate, and balanced journalism. But right now we need your help to continue our efforts. Please take a minute to click here to our secure donation page to make a contribution.

Our success this year has only been because friends like you care about Israel's image and are outraged when the Canadian media misreports the facts. Please join us in defending Israel against biased reporting by considering the following sponsorship options:


Thank you for all you do on behalf of Israel.

Sincerely,

 
 
Mike Fegelman
Executive Director, HonestReporting Canada
mike@honestreporting.ca

P.S. Checks payable to HonestReporting Canada can be sent to:

HonestReporting Canada
P.O. Box 6, Station Q
Toronto, Ontario
M4T 2L7
Office: (416) 915-9157
 

 

 

You are currently subscribed to honestreportingcanada as: pressing4truth.canada@blogger.com
Add info@honestreporting.ca to your email address book to ensure delivery
Forward to a Friend  |  Manage Subscription  |   Subscribe  |   Unsubscribe
Net Atlantic

VIDEO:Canada Human Rights

VIDEO of CTV PowerPlay Canada Human? Rights Commission?

Iranian S-Elections?

Evolution / Intelligent Design

Legitimate Questions Should Be Discussed

I am reminded of how established "science" has been wrong many times before such as in the case of Piltdown man. So could it be wrong now? Or has it been perfected? Should not reasonable arguments be considered?

We have become a nation of beggars

Terence Corcoran reports in the National Post on Friday, January 16, 2009 that the STIMULUS everyone is yelling for may only work over a short period and may actually MAKE THE ECONOMY WORSE over longer periods.

[Read the article below for the researchers who studied this phenomenon.]

POINTS

- "What if, as a wide and growing school of economists now suspect, the government spending and stimulus theory is a crock that is shovel-ready to be heaved out into the barnyard of economic waste?"

- Even disciples of Keynes, such as Harvard's Greg Mankiw, recently highlighted economic studies that show government spending binges -- shocks, they are sometimes called -- don't seem to help the economy grow. They might even make it worse.

-One of the studies cited by Mr. Mankiw was by two European economists (Andrew Mountford and Harald Uhlig), titled "What are the Effects of Fiscal Shocks?" It looked at big deficit-financed spending increases and found that they stimulate the economy for the first year, but "only weakly" compared with a deficit financed tax cut. The overriding problem is that the deficits crowd out private investment and, over the long run, may make the economy worse. "The resulting higher debt burdens may have long-term consequences which are far worse than the short-term increase in GDP."

-A paper by two economists, including the current chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, Olivier Blanchard, concluded that increased taxes and "increases in government spending have a strong negative effect on private investment spending."

-Roberto Perotti, an Italian economist with links to Columbia University, in "Estimating the Effects of Fiscal Policy in OECD Countries," found nothing but bad news for Keynesians. Economic growth is little changed after big increases in government spending, but there are signs of weakening private investment.

- What we all might logically intuit to be true -- spend government money, especially borrowed money, and you stimulate growth -- has long been thought to be a fallacy by some economists. That thought is now spreading. British economist William Buiter said the massive Obama fiscal stimulus proposals "are afflicted by the Keynesian fallacy on steroids."

The whole article by Terrance Corcoran follows:

Are you "shovel-ready," poised to hit the ground running, or merely desperate for cheap cash to get through the recession? If so, here's your last chance to apply to Ottawa for a piece of the massive government spending-bailout-infrastructure-stimulus operation now being prepared for Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's Jan. 27 budget extravaganza.

To get you going, the National Post has created an all-purpose Stimulus Canada application document. Simply make sure your company/institution fills out the form here to get in on the action.

We're just kidding, of course, or at least we were until our satirical Stimulus Canada General Application Form was mugged by reality, which is rapidly turning out to be funnier than the fanciful idea of a government department called Stimulus Canada. To all intents and purposes, Stimulus Canada already exists.

Government money to flow, the taps are opening, deficits are no problem. The spending, as Stephen Harper said after a meeting with the premiers on Friday, will be "very significant" and there will be "very significant deficits." That could mean new spending of $20-billion and deficits of $40-billion.

Industry groups, corporate opportunists, charities, municipal politicians, arts groups, provincial premiers, tech firms, mining companies, forestry operators, banks, money lenders -- in fact, just about everybody has come forward to get in on Canada's portion of what is turning out to be a mad global government stimulus pandemic.

Each claims to have a plan or an idea that they say would produce jobs, spending, investment and activity that would get Canada through the recession and stimulate the economy.

At some point, though, the clamour of claims and calls becomes absurd, and that point looks to have been crossed the other day in the United States when porn merchant Larry Flint said the U.S. sex industry was falling on hard times, business was down 25%, and it needed a $5-billion slice of the $1.2-billion U.S. stimulus program.

And why not?

Mr. Flint has a point. It is not totally illogical for anyone to think that way. If you spend a dollar somewhere -- whether building a bridge or operating a forest company or buying a car -- it generates activity. And, after all, it's a grand old economic theory, created by John Maynard Keynes, that spending, especially government spending, rolls through the economy on a giant multiplier, piling jobs on jobs, growth on growth.

Except for one problem: What if it's not true? What if, as a wide and growing school of economists now suspect, the government spending and stimulus theory is a crock that is shovel-ready to be heaved out into the barnyard of economic waste?

The Prime Minister, in his comments on Friday, seemed to be riding right into the barnyard. He said the government would be simply "borrowing money that is not being used" and "that business is afraid to invest." By borrowing that money, and turning it over to all the groups and interests looking for part of the stimulus spending, he would be jump-starting activity while the private sector got its legs back.

Even disciples of Keynes, such as Harvard's Greg Mankiw, recently highlighted economic studies that show government spending binges -- shocks, they are sometimes called -- don't seem to help the economy grow. They might even make it worse.

One of the studies cited by Mr. Mankiw was by two European economists (Andrew Mountford and Harald Uhlig), titled "What are the Effects of Fiscal Shocks?" It looked at big deficit-financed spending increases and found that they stimulate the economy for the first year, but "only weakly" compared with a deficit financed tax cut. The overriding problem is that the deficits crowd out private investment and, over the long run, may make the economy worse. "The resulting higher debt burdens may have long-term consequences which are far worse than the short-term increase in GDP."

Two other studies point in the same direction. A paper by two economists, including the current chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, Olivier Blanchard, concluded that increased taxes and "increases in government spending have a strong negative effect on private investment spending."

Roberto Perotti, an Italian economist with links to Columbia University, in "Estimating the Effects of Fiscal Policy in OECD Countries," found nothing but bad news for Keynesians. Economic growth is little changed after big increases in government spending, but there are signs of weakening private investment.

What we all might logically intuit to be true -- spend government money, especially borrowed money, and you stimulate growth -- has long been thought to be a fallacy by some economists. That thought is now spreading. British economist William Buiter said the massive Obama fiscal stimulus proposals "are afflicted by the Keynesian fallacy on steroids."

Over at Stimulus Canada, Mr. Harper's plan looks somewhat more modest and Canada is not in the same fiscal fix as the United States. But Ottawa and the provinces are clearly ready to borrow big wads of money from the future to stimulate the economy today. It's money that is supposedly sitting out there in the timid hands of investors who will be repaid with tax dollars later.

But if that stimulus spending does not generate much fresh economic growth, and the borrowing chews up money that private investors could invest in the future, the shovel-ready brigades who get the cash today will produce only short term gains at the expense of the long term health of the economy.

Educational Purposes Only

All articles quoted here are for educational purposes only. Canada-For-Truth encourages you to read the original articles on their respective sites.
We do not necessarily agree with all links posted here but we include them to bring balance to an unbalanced media.