Correction Request Made on the NYT’s ‘Manufacturing Recession’ Claim

Previous Posts:

• August 21 — New York Times Twists Data to Make Great Personal Income News Appear Awful
• August 21 — Source Data Update Post
• August 22 — The NYT’s Six-Month Uncorrected ‘Manufacturing Recession’ Claim

___________________________________

New York Times reporter David Cay Johnston responded this afternoon to the e-mail I sent to him last night, part of which was, with his knowledge, posted here this morning.

After yesterday’s brush with the blogosphere over his “2005 Incomes, on Average, Still Below 2000 Peak” report, I didn’t really expect Mr. Johnston to provide a reply to the criticisms he received beyond those he provided here at BizzyBlog, at Tom Maguire’s place (here and here), and at Back Talk. He hasn’t done so here, and I don’t expect any future feedback.

Johnston’s e-mail today didn’t deal with the content of yesterday’s BizzyBlog or other posts, either. That’s okay. I think the blogospheric dissection (more examples from today are here and here) of his reporting, and of the tone of his blog comments on this particular story, have taken him down a peg or two. I suspect he doesn’t agree; or perhaps does but doesn’t care; or perhaps he’s decided, having said his piece, to move on to other things. So we’ll have to leave it at that.

But Johnston did advise me that if I have a complaint about David Leonhardt’s made-up and still not retracted claim of a manufacturing recession way back in February, I should contact the Times’s Standards Editor and Public Editor, and, “as a matter of civility and good manners,” copy Mr. Leonhardt on whatever I send.

The Standards Editor is Craig Whitney, last seen in the Times this past Sunday in a story about Wikipedia vandalism (oh, excuse me, “Corporate Fingerprints”). Certain of Mr. Whitney’s co-workers have been caught red-handed vandalizing the Wiki entries of George Bush and Condi Rice, offenses Times reporter Katie Hafner saved for Paragraphs 26 and 27. One can only surmise that she felt her colleagues’ transgressions against prominent figures of the Bush Awere “obviously” less important than at least a dozen other narrower and mostly corporate-driven edits:

And The New York Times Company is among those whose employees have made, among hundreds of innocuous changes, a handful of questionable edits. A change to the page on President Bush, for instance, repeated the word “jerk” 12 times. And in the entry for Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state, the word “pianist” was changed to “penis.”

“It’s impossible to determine who did any of these things,” said Craig R. Whitney, the standards editor of The Times. “But you can only shake your head when you see what was done to the George Bush and Condoleezza Rice entries.”

Maybe computer geeks can set me straight, but I’m quite skeptical of Mr. Whitney’s untraceability claim (see Comment 3 below from NixGuy [thanks!] — make that very, very skeptical).

The Public Editor is Clark Hoyt; his latest offering, an attempt to placate “you’re not moonbatty enough” Times readers who are clearly having a hard time digesting the rare-occasion solid reporting about Iran’s involvement in Iraq (duh), is here. Hoyt replaced Bryan Calame, whose May swan-song column is here.

I sent the follow e-mail to Mr. Whitney and Mr. Hoyt, copying Mr. Leonhardt and Mr. Johston (links were included in the e-mail; hopefully they’ll get through at the other end):

Dear Mr. Whitney and Mr. Hoyt,

At the suggestion of David Cay Johnston, I am sending this e-mail to complain of a longstanding example of erroneous and very poor reporting by David Leonhardt that, after nearly six months, has not been acknowledged, let alone corrected.

Mr. Leonhardt informed Times readers on February 28 that the US manufacturing sector was in a recession (”Manufacturing Slips Quietly Into Recession”) — Not heading towards one, or on the verge of one, but in one.

First of all, it is improper to characterize only one sector of an economy as being in a recession. Recession is a macroeconomic term. Applying the word to a single sector of the economy is technically incorrect and should be seen as deliberately pejorative.

Even beyond that, the manufacturing sector has not been in anything resembling dire or even difficult straits for over four years. According to data published monthly by the highly-respected Institute for Supply Management, the sector barely went into contraction in November 2006 and January 2007 (second item at link); it has expanded in 48 of the past 50 months, including, according to ISM’s Manufacturing Index history page, the months of February through July 2007. The February report indicating expansion was released on March 1, the very first day after Leonhardt’s woefully wrong “recession” article.

A Times search on “manufacturing recession” (not in quotes) appears to indicate that the Times has never retracted Mr. Leonhardt’s manufacturing “recession” call, although that call was, and remains, self-evidently untrue. In fact, the TimeSelect abstract for Mr. Leonhardt’s story even refers to the entire economy being in a recession. That also was, and remains, self-evidently untrue. This situation, uncorrected, leaves Mr. Leonhardt and the Times justifiably vulnerable to charges of agenda-driven reporting. The “recession” claim never had any foundation. It should be an embarrassment to the Times each day it stands.

I would hope, and expect, that the Times will correct this matter with all deliberate speed.

Regards,
Tom Blumer
BizzyBlog.com

I will report back any responses or results. Set your own expectations.