Scrubbing Away Their Sins

We used to be able to throw out the news; to disappear it.

The morning paper would find its way into the trash. A radio or television newscast would float off into the ether. It’s a cliché to say it by now, but the Web has changed that.

Articles and broadcasts now reside in online archives, are quoted or embedded on blogs, and republished on other news sites. Google keeps a snapshot of the original page cached on its servers. The new permanence of news makes it more important than ever to initially get a story right, lest an error rocket around the world. But when prevention fails, a suitable correction must follow. Unfortunately, that doesn’t always happen …

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.