The Art of "Quotemanship" and "Misquotemanship" | Quoting people accurately is really hard — and you can quote me on that.

by Frank Herron
0 comments

The Hazards of Familiarity: My Quote Belongs to Stoppard

Sometimes we know a little too much for our own good when it comes to reporting some quoted material, even if it’s from, say, the line of a play. This happened in the New York Times in an article published on March 25.
The article, a review of Travesties by Tom Stoppard, which was playing in Princeton, quoted a line from the play as “My heart belongs to Dada.”
However, as was corrected thoroughly a week later, the line is actually “My art belongs to Dada.”
Both would be a clever twist on a song title, which might already lurk in the brain of any arts critic.
Did the writer’s (or editor’s) mind follow a low-resistance path to “My Heart Belongs to Daddy” by Cole Porter (right).
You can hear Sophie Milman sing a version here.

by Frank Herron
0 comments

A Steroid Quote: Don’t give away the ending

There’s a correction in the Philadelphia Inquirer of 4 April 2012:

A story in some editions Tuesday misquoted Rutgers professor David Redlawsk, who said: “Those working toward the merger have apparently not made their case to New Jerseyans over the past six weeks.”

I appreciate any public correction, kind of. Unlike the New York Times, the Inquirer (like many other news outlets) avoids telling readers exactly what was wrong with the original quote. Nor does it here give the subject of the article, or even the headline. This evasiveness seems strange, although it lines up with a general industry-wide desire not to repeat an error. I get that when libel might be a concern. But that’s rare. Clarity is good. Transparency, remember, is something journalists often demand of others. This approach seems a bit hypocritical.
Anyway, back to the Inquirer.
The story, “Democratic war of words over Rutgers-Rowan merger plan continues”, dealt with the possible realignment of two universities: Rowan and Rutgers-Camden. (Rowan is the University Formerly Known As Glassboro State College,) The story said a recent poll found that 59 percent of registered voters in the state of New Jersey were against the planned merger. That fact the stage for a quotation from Redlawsk, which ended the article. The quote and attribution were presented this way:

“Those working toward the merger have apparently not made their case to New Jerseyans,” Rutgers political science professor David Redlawsk said in a statement.

Attributing the words to “a statement” implies some sort of written source. Therefore, it’s easy to check the accuracy. Unfortunately, the quote ran out of gas and stopped at 14 words, five words short of the full sentence.
This is, essentially, what happened to the statement:

“Those working toward the merger have apparently not made their case to New Jerseyans ~~over the past six weeks~~.”

The amputation removed what Mr. Redlawsk (right) surely thought was a key qualifier. The time-frame, given the ongoing nature of the merger discussion, would seem to be important. Dropping the last five words makes the statement much more far-reaching, and turns it into a sweeping criticism with no beginning or ending.

I call this a STEROID QUOTE, one that is strengthened by the removal of a qualifying phrase.

by Frank Herron
0 comments

Tale of the Tape: Abridged Too Far

Thanks to Erik Wemple (“NBC issues apology on Zimmerman tape screw-up”; 04/03/2012) and others for staying on top of NBC’s mishandling of the recording of the police dispatcher’s discussion with George Zimmerman, a volunteer neighborhood watch leader, who admitted shooting and killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida, in February but claimed it was in self-defence.
On its “Today” show on March 27, NBC presented a portion of Zimmerman’s call this way:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.

Anyone who had heard the complete recording could tell right away that something was wrong. Zimmerman did NOT volunteer his impression of the race of the “guy”. Here’s how the conversation really went (as a part of this recording):

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: OK, and this guy—is he black, white or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.

Presented another way, here’s how this verbal material was mangled by NBC in its broadcast on March 27, with the deleted material crossed out:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: OK, and this guy—is he black, white or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.

It removed Zimmerman’s speculation about the “guy” being on drugs. It ensured that listeners would think that race was one of the first things on Zimmerman’s mind.

NBC’s apology was of the evasive, obfuscatory “mistakes-were-made” mold:

“During our investigation it became evident that there was an error made in the production process that we deeply regret. We will be taking the necessary steps to prevent this from happening in the future and apologize to our viewers.”

Both Fox News and media watchdog NewsBusters pointed out this mishandling of the recording. MSNBC used the same abridgment as the “Today” show, too. It changed its online reporting about the tape and the recording, calling the change a “clarification.” At the bottom of the story, an Editor’s note says,

“A clarification was made to this story on March 28, 2012. An earlier version of the story truncated George Zimmerman’s quotes to a 911 operator in a way that may have changed the meaning.”