August 15, 2016

"An earlier version of this article erroneously connected the epithet 'libtard' with the radio host Rush Limbaugh."

The New Yorker makes a correction and acknowledges its error, which I called attention to a few days ago in a post titled "Whatever happened to The New Yorker's pride in meticulous fact-checking?!"

34 comments:

Man in PA said...

Well, at least he fixed it but that was an unforgivable mistake.

Lyle Sanford, RMT said...

congratulations!

madAsHell said...

Yes, congratulations!! Perhaps, your voice has been heard.

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

Net result: NYT twice associates "Libtard" with "Rush Limbaugh's favorite phrase."

Crafty, that!

Drago said...

Just think, it took only a few days for the layers and layers of fact-checkers for a "reality-based" lefty publication to do a 10 second google search.

Not that it will matter.

Legions of lefties even now believe, fervently, that "libtard" is Rush Limbaughs favorite term of derision and thus it becomes a "truth" in the leftist canon.

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dave in Tucson said...

Ah, good old passive voice. Nobody was at fault, it somehow just happened that way.

Meanwhile, a small disclaimer placed demurely after the end of the article will make sure no one ever notices it. Just like with the NYT police shoot unarmed (oops, actually armed) man story, the damage has been done, no one will face any consequences, and that's all that matters.

Lem said...

Good catch Althouse. Keep them honest.

Fernandinande said...

"Yorktard" sounds too much like candy.

JAORE said...

LIBTARD, LIBTARD, LIBTARD! RUSH, RUSH, RUSH. LINKED TOGETHER LIKE CONJOINED TWINS. ALL RUSH, ALL LIBTARD ALL THE TIME.*






* or not......

n.n said...

A misprint approaching libel. Did Mishra have a gay old time?

Left Bank of the Charles said...

That correction makes it sound like they called Limbaugh a libtard.

wild chicken said...

Rush is pretty careful in his speech.

But, dogwhistles!

wildswan said...

Good job. Lots of people who have never listened to Rush are sure they know what he says and how he talks. He mostly analyzes how the media is presenting the world but "analyze media presentations"? ... that might be too puzzling for a lib...eral to imagine.

Sam L. said...

Their meticulous fact checking was likely always a lie.

Big Mike said...

However it certainly seems true based on this and other recent blunders that the type of liberals who work for the Times really are more than a little mentally challenged.

Freder Frederson said...

I guess you're not worried about Rush's (non-existent) fact checking.

Humperdink said...

OK Freder, I'll bite, serve up a Rush error for the Althouse populace.

Otto said...

Good girl.

amy amy said...

A misprint approaching libel. Did Mishra have a gay old time? Great article. I read this article properly. This is one of the best posts. Thanks sharing this article
tshirthell,Redbubble coupon code,spreadshirt review,threadless uk,Teepublic,Teefury review,80stees

Fernandinande said...

amy amy said...
I read this article properly.


Settle a space in a twinkling at your happy time!

David Begley said...

What power Althouse has! She brings the elite East Coast media to its knees.
On Wisconsin!

Levi Starks said...

Erroneous...

tim in vermont said...

Rush tries to be careful about his facts. He has been on the air for 30 years, pretty much 15 hours a week, so he certainly has made some errors, but lets hear about any errors he has made in the past couple of years. That would be interesting. Not a hyperlink, unless it is to a single error, because accusations of errors that are false take too long to refute to go through an entire list, just give us the strongest one in the past two years. Should be simple since Rush "has no fact checking."

Rusty said...

Freder Frederson said...
"I guess you're not worried about Rush's (non-existent) fact checking."

Yes. Please. Examples.

James Pawlak said...

The"New Yorker" understands that the Pulitzer Prize of this era no longer represents their efforts. That periodical is now reaching for the "John Paul Goebbels"award.

M Jordan said...

This brought joy to my dark, withered heart. I have such contempt for the maggot-infested media that ... well, enough said.

EMD said...

Someone should fact-check the commentariat, re: The New Yorker/New York Times.

Of course, they all look the same to us.

Bay Area Guy said...

Well done Althouse! Now if you could do something about those unfunny cartoons......

harkin said...

The Times still had an old article up that said George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin, after first firing a warning shot, two years after the incident. Rachel Maddow took almost a year I think to finally admit Rush had not praised James Earl Ray for shooting MLK. These people have no shame.

PB said...

No one reads corrections. Damage done can't really be repaired.

Kebas said...

However, it is still characterized as a "conservative epithet," so while the article may no longer slander Rush Limbaugh directly, it does slander all conservatives. Some future Oxford English Dictionary may ferret it out, but it seems the origin of the phrase is unknown. Apparently, the more likely etymology has it originating not as a blending of and insult directed toward "liberal" but rather "libertarian."

The impression is conveyed in the article that this phrase has wide currency in conservative circles, but surely no more so than "wingnuts," "teabaggers," etc. on the left. Indeed, a very informal survey has Google returning 1,940,000 results for "wingnut," 509,000 for "teabagger," and only 422,000 for "libtard."

So, on the one hand we have no idea who coined the insult "libtard," only confirmation that it was not Rush Limbaugh. However, on the other side of the equation, we have video evidence of Vice-President Gore characterizing Republicans as "the extra-chromosome right wing," as well as President Obama's "joke" about the Special Olympics. I'd say such comments mocking the plight of the disabled by a sitting President and Vice-President far outweighs something never actually said by a radio commentator.

kehvan said...

This doesn't prove Rousseau correct, because not a single republican, conservative, or low-brow Trump supporter I know desire a retreat from the philosophies of Voltaire or Adam Smith. More than anything, what I see is anger at how the Frankfurt School has successfully fulfilled their long march through our institutions.

mikee said...

Could be worse, the magazine might have noticed that Limbaugh doesn't like the policies of liberal progressive leftist Democrats. That would be a really shocking report for their readers!