Reuters Sorry About Pre-Releasing Kinda Bitchy Soros Obit, Not Sorry Enough To Take It Down

from the things-are-busy dept

Fri, Apr 19th 2013 3:01am — Mike Masnick

From our friends over at Dealbreaker, we learn that those bastions of professional journalism, Reuters, published a premature obituary for George Soros (where they left in the XXs for his age).

Upon realizing this, Reuters issued an apology, but apparently left the original story up for about an hour before someone realized that perhaps they should pull it down.

Hey, everyone makes mistakes, but it seems a little silly when people want to argue that bloggers are untrustworthy and that the mainstream media is careful about these things. Following their massive fuck up concerning the Boston Marathon bombing and then followed by stories like this, I think it's safe to note that mistakes happen across the board -- though it seems as if amateur blogs and the like often seem a lot faster about making corrections...

Filed Under: george soros, journalism, obituary, reporting
Companies: reuters

27 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

yaga (profile), 19 Apr 2013 @ 4:28am

sad?
I find it kind of sad that many news organizations have pre-written obits for many famous people so that they can try to be the first to announce it. Obviously they should spend a little more time on fact-checking and double checking what they are about to print or post online than trying to post the first obit about someone's death.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Vidiot (profile), 19 Apr 2013 @ 4:35am
  
  Re: sad?
  Ahh, the race to be the first to report the news. Any news. Any trivial, worthless crumb of news.
  
  Worked really well for CNN when they announced Boston arrests the other day. (Why does no one really call them out on this?)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - jupiterkansas (profile), 19 Apr 2013 @ 7:03am
    
    Re: Re: sad?
    I guess you don't watch Jon Stewart?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - jupiterkansas (profile), 19 Apr 2013 @ 7:05am
      
      Re: Re: Re: sad?
      whoops, forgot the link
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Vidiot (profile), 19 Apr 2013 @ 10:24am
      
      Re: Re: Re: sad?
      Oh, he counts for me, but you KNOW that Colbert and Stewart don't really count for the big-pants grownup world. A Times expose would be nice. Or maybe re-branding CNN as a cooking channel... we need more of those.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - jupiterkansas (profile), 19 Apr 2013 @ 12:26pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: sad?
        The fact that the Times or CNN doesn't do this is the reason I don't pay attention to them. And I wear big pants.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2013 @ 7:04am
    
    Re: Re: sad?
    How about Reddit and Twitter's Sunil Tripathi EPIC fail? That one won't be forgotten soon.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2013 @ 4:33am

What is wrong with that liberal media these days.
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RyanNerd (profile), 19 Apr 2013 @ 4:43am

Dewey Defeats Truman
Nothing new here. Liberal or not the media have always been a bunch of idiots.

Unfortunately many people believe anything they read.

Life Magazine is for those who can't read.
Newsweek and Time are for those who can't think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2013 @ 4:55am

George Soros died at XXX?....well at least he died in a stripper joint, it's what he would have wanted....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
JarHead (profile), 19 Apr 2013 @ 5:05am

-- though it seems as if amateur blogs and the like often seem a lot faster about making corrections...

Well, to be fair, "amateurs" tend to be less multitasking, hence can keep a significant focus on the topic at hand. Hence errors can be more readily detected and rectified.

Pros, however, tend to multitask a lot, and focus are divided among several topics, and not to mention the "check and balances" guideline they must adhere, which tends to be much more stricter than those adhered by amateurs (cos their names depend on it). Errors are slower to detect, and once detected, there's the check-and-recheck phase. So, in terms of error detection and correction, "amateurs" tend to be more "agile" and "robust".

Of course this is an over generalization and simplification...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 19 Apr 2013 @ 9:45am
  
  Re:
  All the more reason to trust the amateurs more than the pros.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2013 @ 5:27am

"Hey, everyone makes mistakes, but it seems a little silly when people want to argue that bloggers are untrustworthy and that the mainstream media is careful about these things."

You're more untrustworthy than most, Mike. Everyone makes mistakes, but most people do basic journalism before publishing articles--unlike you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2013 @ 5:49am
  
  Response to: Anonymous Coward on Apr 19th, 2013 @ 5:27am
  Get a fucking life.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    
    Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2013 @ 6:09am
    
    Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Apr 19th, 2013 @ 5:27am
    He says that he does journalism from time to time, and of course he never explains how we're supposed to know when he's doing journalism and when he's not. Why should we believe anything he writes? Maybe he's not doing journalism.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2013 @ 6:31am
      
      Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Apr 19th, 2013 @ 5:27am
      "He says that he does journalism from time to time, and of course he never explains how we're supposed to know when he's doing journalism and when he's not. Why should we believe anything he writes? Maybe he's not doing journalism."
      
      AC says that he has a brain, and of course the boy never explains how we're supposed to know when he's using it and when he's not. Why should we believe anything he writes? Maybe he's not using his brain.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - RyanNerd (profile), 19 Apr 2013 @ 6:35am
      
      Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Apr 19th, 2013 @ 5:27am
      So if Mike is offering an opinion he is lying. But if he is doing journalism only then is he telling the truth?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2013 @ 9:03am
      
      Re: Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Apr 19th, 2013 @ 5:27am
      "Why should we believe anything he writes?"
      
      Sometimes I don't. But you know what? He's really good about linking, and often embedding, his sources. Why should I have to take his word on what some appeals court ruled, when I can just read the whole opinion?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2013 @ 6:29am
  
  Re:
  "You're more untrustworthy than most, Mike. Everyone makes mistakes, but most people do basic journalism before publishing articles--unlike you."
  
  You're more untrustworthy than most, boy. Everyone makes mistakes, but most people do basic journalism before posting comments--unlike you.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2013 @ 8:29am
  
  Re:
  Says the lying AC.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Apr 2013 @ 9:30am
  
  Re:
  Oh, I'm sorry. We should hold everyone to "journo" standards like Teri Buhl, right?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
paul, 19 Apr 2013 @ 6:25am

Seems fair to me
The obit is factual. The only reason he can be a philanthropist is because he made billions by ruining the lives of millions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jay (profile), 19 Apr 2013 @ 12:50pm
  
  Re: Seems fair to me
  ... What?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Skeptical Cynic (profile), 19 Apr 2013 @ 10:01am

Journalism Standards? Meh!
Journalism is about selling. Sure some try to find and create compelling factual pieces, but most don't have that luxury. They must produce or go away.

Good break down of modern journalism.

http://www.mediabistro.com/10000words/10-ugly-truths-about-modern-journalism_b361
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PRMan, 19 Apr 2013 @ 10:18am

Surprised, Mike...
You won't let Tim use foul language and then you come out with it here?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 19 Apr 2013 @ 3:56pm
  
  Re: Surprised, Mike...
  You won't let Tim use foul language and then you come out with it here?
  
  Say what?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous, 19 Apr 2013 @ 3:26pm

Reports of his death have been greatly exaggerated
I guess it was too good to be true.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]