The BBC, which covered the fake news, published a report today revealing the hoax:

The story was reported by many high profile organisations including CNN, the Daily Mail, the Telegraph and Forbes.
Questions about the authenticity of the story were raised by readers of the BBC website who established that the company which put out the research – ApTiquant – appeared to have only set up its website in the past month.
Thumbnail images of the firm’s staff on the website also matched those on the site of French research company Central Test, although many of the names had been changed.
The BBC contacted Central Test who confirmed that they had been made aware of the copy but had no knowledge of ApTiquant or its activities.

Wired.com did a good job highlighting some of the red flags that should have warned journalists off the story:

• AptiQuant had no footprint, no history of past studies of either intelligence or technology, despite claiming to have been a “world leader in the field of online psychometric testing” since 2006;
• The assessment tool was a free online IQ test delivered through search engine ads. This might be a valid methodology for generating spammy pop-ups, but not scientific study. (Snarky aside: we’re supposed to believe that Opera users clicking these ads have an average “superior intelligence” IQ of 125?)
• AptiQuant’s mailing address (if deliverable) would be in the middle of an intersection in downtown Vancouver.
• This paragraph:

The study showed a substantial relationship between an individual’s cognitive ability and their choice of web browser. From the test results, it is a clear indication that individuals on the lower side of the IQ scale tend to resist a change/upgrade of their browsers. This hypothesis can be extended to any software in general, however more research is needed for that, which is a potential future work as an extension to this report.

The fake company’s website now carries this message:

AptiQuant was set up in late July 2011 by comparison shopping website AtCheap.com, in order to launch a fake “study” called “Intelligent Quotient and Browser Usage.” The study claimed that people using Internet Explorer have a below than average IQ score. The study took the IT world by storm. The main purpose behind this hoax was to create awareness about the incompatibilities of IE6, and not to insult or hurt anyone.

Several media outlets published posts admitting they were fooled: Gawker, The Atlantic and NPR.

This, from a local Fox affiliate, may be the worst one I’ve come across (Update: actually, have a look at this video lower down in the post):

Reporting that President Obama has been killed instead of Bin Laden? Yeah, pretty bad. Then there’s this tweet from MSNBC correspondent Norah O’Donnell (thanks, Mallary!):

Gizmodo also has examples from the BBC and a different Fox affiliate than the one featured above. The Fox station later posted a story about all of the Obama/Osama mixups. It mentioned the other Fox affiliate as well as errors from CNN, the Modesto Bee, ABC News and Fox News. And after all of that, they admitted their mistake:

FOX40 also briefly had a graphic up with the wrong name. The original graphic talked about “OBAMA NATIONAL SECURITY ANNOUNCEMENT” and the B remained when it was changed to “OSAMA BIN LADEN.” Station management apologized for the error, as did the network anchors.

What else? Here’s a CNN typo talking about “Obama’s compound” in Pakistan:

Sky News declaring Obama’s death:

Update May 2: Here’s an example from NPR (thanks, Parker!):

Update May 3: A correction from the Charlotte Observer:

A front-page story in some editions Monday incorrectly referred to Osama bin Laden as Obama. In the same story, a photograph cutline wrongly said two aircraft hit the same tower of the World Trade Center. The planes hit different towers. Link

Update May 4: The South China Morning Post published this incorrect correction today:

In a headline on page A2 yesterday, the US president’s first name was erroneously given instead of that of Osama bin Laden. We apologise for the error.

Why is it incorrect? Because the paper made an Obama/Osama error — and that involves the US president’s last name.

Update #2: Huffington Post put together a great video compilation of all the on air flubs:

This may in fact be the worst on air Obama/Osama mixup of all. As New York magazine noted in its headline, “News Anchor Made ‘Osama’/‘Obama’ Gaffe Three Times in Seventeen Seconds.” Part of it is included in the above HuffPo compilation, but this is the full version. From Global TV in Canada

Update May 5: Yet another correction from the Charlotte Observer:

In some editions Wednesday, a front page story about tensions between the U.S. and Pakistani governments incorrectly referred to Osama bin Laden as Obama.

Update May 8: A May 6 correction from the Guardian:

An article meant to name Osama bin Laden, but instead said: “Asked on Wednesday whether the team that killed Obama had come under fire, (Jay) Carney said the White House had gone to the limit in providing details and that any more would risk future operations” (Photos reveal gruesome aftermath of Bin Laden raid, 5 May, page 9 turn from page 1, early editions). Link

Update May 11: From the Sacramento Bee:

A Washington Post story on Page A12 on May 2 and a McClatchy Newspapers Washington Bureau story on Page A13 on May 6 mistakenly used the name Obama instead of Osama in references to Osama bin Laden. Link

US media giant CNN's reporting of Cyclone Yasi blew Queensland off the map, when it depicted the weather-ravaged state as being in Tasmania.

The international news breaker was roundly mocked around the world, when its map of Australia on a news bulletin pointed to Queensland being several thousand kilometres south in a bulletin last week.

While CNN appears to have quickly removed the offending graphic from its website, bemused Australian media watchers and others quickly sent the image viral.

It appears CNN researchers googled Queenstown, which is on Tasmania’s west coast, instead of Queensland, when researching the report.

Thanks, Lawrie!

As is often the case, this led to a lot of mistakes — including reports from NPR, Reuters, CNN, Fox News and others that said Rep. Giffords had died. I've collected the mistaken reports and other notable reaction and commentary from Twitter in a Storify story below.

Update January 9: For those interested in figuring out the right way to correct tweets, I offered some best practices in this previous CJR column. And I also previously suggested that Twitter enable a correction function.

Update January 9 #2: I collected other notable commentary about the media errors in this post.

Let me know if I'm missing any notable tweets or reporting:

Thanks, Daniel!

We had a graphic on the screen that said “department of jihad” followed by a question mark and many of you tweeted me that you found that graphic to be offensive. I agree, it was. The graphic referenced a video produced by Liz Cheney’s organization “Keep America Safe.” Their video features those words on screen questioning the loyalty of justice department attorneys who had previously worked on behalf of Guantanamo detainees. CNN had no intention of suggesting that the Justice Department supports terrorism. Lawyers at the Justice Department are patriotic Americans and we certainly regret any confusion that may have been caused by our graphic. Link

Thanks, Daniel!

*Correction March 8, 2010: The headline of this post original and incorrectly referred to “Wold Blitzer,” instead of Wolf Blitzer. It has been corrected. Thanks to Marty for spotting this embarrassing typo. And then Charlene pointed out the fact that I had also misspelled the bearded one’s last name (“Bitzer”). (Turns out Mark caught that one as well.) An impressive bit of work on my part.

Guam – CNN has agreed to provide free air time for commercials touting Guam as a tourist destination to make up for the networks mistake in airing footage of Yap last year and calling it Guam.
The Guam visitors bureau says the TV commercials promoting Guam as a world-class destination will begin airing on CNN and CNN International next week.
The commercial are being provided at no cost, after GVB complained to CNN about the erroneous report that aired on May 24, last year.
According to a release, GVB says it felt strongly that the footage misrepresented Guam’s culture and the island’s cosmopolitan appeal.
The TV commercials will air for one week, beginning Monday, January 19 until Sunday the 25th.

This is the first time I’ve seen a news organization offer advertising as compensation for an editorial mistake. Does it mean CNN didn’t  air a correction? Or is the ad in addition to a correction?

On Nov. 29, the story ran in Wales Online: “We thought we were safe… then CNN stepped in!” said the headline. As of this writing you can still find it listed in the site’s own search results — but the story itself is no longer available on Wales Online. According to excerpts of this mainstream news report that appeared on several sites, the now-vanished Wales Online story began:
“A South Wales couple caught in the Mumbai terror attacks claimed last night that CNN put their lives at risk by broadcasting where they were. Lynne and Kenneth Shaw, of Penarth, warned that terrorists were listening in to the media to pinpoint Western victims. Mrs. Shaw claimed the American cable TV channel had broadcast details of where they were at the Taj Mahal Palace Hotel…”
Apparently, this particular claim of media irresponsibility wasn’t true. But when it first ran, even Tobin Harshaw of the New York Times repeated the allegation — although he did correct it this morning. That’s because the editor of Wales Online sent a note to Harbin (and conservative commentator Michelle Malkin, who harshly criticized CNN for it’s alleged misstep) which said:
“The story was taken from the Press Association news agency, who have since stated: ‘Press Association would like to make clear that the interviewee’s allegations that CNN broadcast details compromising her and her husband’s safety have since been clarified by the interviewee’s husband to Press Association as not valid.’ I would be grateful if you could post the above clarification. I should also let you know that the article has now been removed from WalesOnline.co.uk…”
Today Turner Broadcasting posted a CNN press release refuting the allegation. And Mediabistro’s TVNewser also ran updates with CNN’s refutation and the Press Association’s retraction.
According to CNN spokesperson Nigel Pritchard, when the Press Association contacted CNN for comment on the Shaw’s allegations, CNN issued a “holding statement” while they reviewed all their broadcast and streamed video from the relevant parts of the crisis. In the meantime, the Press Association account ran. When CNN found nothing to corroborate the Shaws’ alleged statements, they contacted the Press Association to refute those allegations. Shortly afterward, the Press Association story was retracted.

Instead of updating its article with the retraction, Wales Online simply removed the original story. Poof! Nothing to see here.

“Right now, the key media organizations involved are acting as if this never happened — to varying degrees — by making information about this story-gone-awry hard to find,” writes Gahran. “This is likely to confuse or frustrate Internet users, bloggers, and social media users who try to track down the truth, thus encouraging the spread of misinformation.”

This is an example of why scrubbing is such an unethical and fundamentally unprofessional practice. On the web, you can’t just pretend that a mistake never happened. It’s already been cached, blogged, linked… Wales Online and especially the Press Association have to make an effort to spread the correct information. That’s journalism.

Gahran also makes the point that CNN should do everything it can to make the correct information easily available:

Why not run a CNN.com story clarifying what the rumor was, that it is demonstrably false, and what CNN did to disprove it? Something that would be easy to find and link to? Pritchard says CNN has no plans to do this: “It’s not up to us to respond to false allegations.”

…That may have been true in an earlier era. But these days if you want to stop a rumor, your correction or refutation must be easily findable and linkable — because the rumor certainly will be.

UPDATE Dec 3: Amy Gahran added this information to her post today:

When I originally posted this story, I reported “Wales Online simply removed the article from their site. As far as I can tell by searching their site, they have not yet published a correction or explanation. It’s simply gone, and inbound links to it are now broken.” Since then, Wales Online posted this correction at a different URL. As of this writing, the URL of the original story still remains blank, with no forwarding to or indication of the correction. Also, I received e-mails from Wales Online editor Tim Horton and Press Association editor Jonathan Grun — both of whom simply confirmed that the Press Association story was “not valid” and had “been removed.” As of this writing, the Press Association site still appears to bear no mention of the story or the retraction.

These organizations are trying to disappear a mistake as if they’re some kind of news junta.

CNN said Wednesday that commentator Jack Cafferty was referring to China’s leaders not the Chinese people when he described them as a “bunch of goons and thugs,” and apologized to anyone who thought otherwise.
On Tuesday, China demanded an apology for Jack Cafferty’s comments broadcast on CNN, in which he also described Chinese products as “junk.”
Beijing had already singled out U.S.-based CNN as among Western news outlets that produced allegedly biased coverage of violent anti-government protests in Tibet and across western China last month.
“CNN would like to clarify that it was not Mr. Cafferty’s, nor CNN’s, intent to cause offense to the Chinese people, and would apologize to anyone who has interpreted the comments in this way,” the network said in an e-mailed statement.
“CNN is a network that reports the news in an objective and balanced fashion. However, as part of our coverage we also employ commentators who provide robust opinions that generate debate,” it said.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry said Cafferty’s comments reflected his “ignorance and … hostility” toward China.
“We are shocked and strongly condemn the vicious remarks by Cafferty,” ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu said Tuesday. “We solemnly request CNN and Cafferty himself take back the malicious remarks and apologize to the Chinese people.”
The famously curmudgeonly Cafferty had been speaking during an April 9 appearance on “The Situation Room,” according to a transcript posted on the CNN Web site.
“We continue to import their junk with the lead paint on them and the poisoned pet food and export, you know, jobs to places where you can pay workers a dollar a month to turn out the stuff that we’re buying from Wal-Mart,” Cafferty said, according to the transcript.
“So I think our relationship with China has certainly changed,” he continued. “I think they’re basically the same bunch of goons and thugs they’ve been for the last 50 years.”
…

It’s kind of like someone apologizing for making you mad, rather than for the thing that made you mad. Video of the offending remark here.