More on The N&O's Sago mine reporting

At Raleigh News & Observer public editor Ted Vaden's blog there are currently two comments concerning his Sunday, Jan. 8, column. That's the column in which he tells readers he "can't find fault" with The N&O for its botched, front page Jan. 4 "miners found alive" story.

How do you think that want down in the newsroom and executive offices in Raleigh, and at parent company McClatchy's California exec suites?

We really needn't pause, do we?

So moving right along ---

One of the two comments is quite critical of The N&O (No, it's not mine).

The other is very supportive of The N&O (That's not mine, either).

I've copied and pasted the entire supportive comment below.

After the comment, I ask some questions and make a few remarks.

I plan to use my questions and remarks as a basis for both a comment at Vaden's blog and a post here tomorrow.

If you are new to this story, stay with it. Search back through archives of the last seven days. News is developing all the time.

Example: Before today, how many N&O readers knew that its executive editor for news, Melanie Sill, and Vaden had explained nothing to readers about The N&O's other mine story on Jan. 4?

You'll read about that story and find a reference to it in my remarks.

Now the supportive comment made at Vaden's blog:
____________

Comment from: Ted at State [Visitor]
01/10/06 at 14:24

Does everything have to be about the N & O's presumed liberal bias? Let's look at the facts:

* The rescuers were given a code phrase if they found them dead and another if they found them alive. No one had the foresight to create one if some were dead and others alive.

* Communications in a mineshaft is pretty bad. I can't get my cell phone to work half the time when I'm in my office, much less 3 miles into a mine (and 250 feet below ground).

* The rescue team was focused on rescue. They heard moaning, so someone was alive. Unfortunately, it was only one person.

The N&O went with everyone else and published the story. They blew it, but not as much as the company withholding the correct information. The N&O hopefully will use this as an opportunity to improve.

Now, as to the comparison to Bush's team and WMD, I really don't see the connection. Rather than a miscommunication over a very short period of time, the WMD conclusion involved selectively reading intelligence reports over several months. The administration decided the outcome, and chose to use or ignore intelligence based on how it supported the outcome.

Calling the N&O liberal is really laughable. You should read some papers that ARE liberal or even progressive. The N&O seems somewhat to the right of the middle, and some of their editorial writers (such as Martinez) seem to be trying to get an invitation to appear on The O'Reilly Factor.
***************************************************************

Now some JinC remarks:

Comments to Ted at State ---

What company withheld “the correct information ?” Provide a name and a few facts.

Have you told N&O exec editor for news, Melanie Sill, and public editor, Ted Vaden, that a “company” withheld the “correct information?”

Do you know anything about The N&O's other Jan. 4 mine story?

It’s the two-column story that ran at least in The N&O’s West and Final editions on the same day The N&O reported the miners had been found alive.

The N&O’s other Jan. 4 mine story ran on pg. 10A beside the inside portion of its front page “found alive” story.

It begins, "Even as 12 of 13 trapped miners were found alive, attention turned to the Sago Mine's history of safety violations - and questions about the White House's commitment to mining safety."

And in the middle of the story The N&O says, “In recent years, Democrats have said the Bush administration’s enforcement of mining safety and environmental regulations must come under scrutiny.”

But nowhere does The N&O mention the many statistics indicating the century-long progress in mine safety has continued under the Bush administration. And The N&O doesn’t tell us anything about the many mine safety experts who dispute its “blame Bush” story.

Here are a few questions for Ted at State and other fans of The N&O’s “news reporting.”

We’ve been told The N&O barely had time to get out its wrong “found alive” story. So how did The N&O find time to also publish its “blame Bush” story?

If The N&O had held off a day or two on its “blame Bush” story, might it have had a little extra time to get its “found alive” headline story right?

And why haven’t Melanie Sill and Ted Vaden even mentioned the “blame Bush” story?

Many readers want to know more about both The N&O "miners found alive" story and its "Bush blaming" story.
______________________________________

More tomorrow.