The Eldridge omission

Published Jul 17 2007, 04:22 PM by Adam Reilly

Here's what David Marcus, the AP's Southern New England bureau chief, has to say about AP's failure to mention Jamie Eldridge in a recent article on the 5th Congressional District race:

What happened was that we did call the Eldridge campaign asking for the information. They did not get back to us in time for the story. But we neglected to mention that they did not get back to us in the story. Since then, they've gotten back to us, and we are producing a short separate [article] with that information [i.e., Eldridge's fundraising numbers]. We have covered the Eldridge camp in the past, and of course we will do so in the future.

My two cents: obviously, Eldridge should have been mentioned in the AP piece. But while the Eldridge campaign should expect to at least be acknowledged in any article on the race, I'd also say someone from the Eldridge camp should have initiated a call to the AP as soon as those fundraising numbers were public, simply to give Eldridge's totals the best spin possible. In the wise words of Charley at Blue Mass. Group:

Note to the Eldridge campaign: You might want to introduce yourselves to the AP reporter on your beat.
Note to AP: ... and vice versa.

The Globe's stench series

A tale of two Al Qaedas

6 Comments

Chop Chop said:

>> The Eldridge camp should have initiated a call to the AP << I agree with you on this one. AP likely called Eldridge campaign headquarters directly. If you're running for office and a major media outlet like the Associated Press calls - you call back. Period. No word on why the Eldridge campaign? Was it a flunky who neglected to pass on the message from the Associated press - or did they simply not want to discuss Eldridge's fundraising numbers with the AP? Keep those articles coming! If newspapers and other tube media held their stories back until every single politician called back we’d never find out anything and the media would be out of business. >> In a recent article on the 5th Congressional District race << RECENT? Don't you mean YESTERDAY? The AP article in the Globe about the 5th Congressional District race (written by Steve LeBlanc of the Associated Press) is dated yesterday, Monday July 16, 2007. That's yesterday! Your post is dated this morning Tue. at 11:22:01 AM. That's a pretty good response time for the AP. The fact that the AP's Southern New England bureau chief offered to follow up by producing a short separate article with that information as their explanation for the omission is a GOOD thing in my opinion. This type of mistake, misquote, omission and then and brief explanation and/or follow up article has NEVER happened here at the Phoenix?

July 17, 2007 6:49 PM
anon said:

Look. Did the Eldridge campaign mess up? Clearly. They should have returned the phone call sooner, developed a stronger relationship with the AP previously, etc etc. Did the AP mess up? Just as clearly, yes. If you're a major media outlet like the Associated Press, you shouldn't make amateur mistakes like leaving the name of one of the candidates out of the story entirely. But as intriguing as the Story of the Missed AP Phonecall is, I think, Adam, you are missing a far more interesting story -- which is the state of the reporting on the MA-O5 race thus far. Take a look at the reporting from the AP, the Globe, the Herald...and compare it, for example, to the reporting from the Lowell Sun. Some outlets seem interested in reporting on the actual race taking place...and some seem interested in calling the race for Tsongas now and moving on. The Eldridge Omission, in the scheme of things, is minor. But it's symptomatic of something a lot bigger in this race.

July 17, 2007 7:16 PM
Adam said:

CC, it's true. "Recent" = "yesterday." Re: your closing question--I won't speak for the Phoenix as a whole, but I've certainly failed to address things in stories and then followed up after the fact, here and elsewhere.

July 17, 2007 7:35 PM
Chop Chop said:

You're right I looked it up. "Recent" = "yesterday." Sorry about that one.

July 17, 2007 8:39 PM
Adam said:

CC, I was actually trying to say you were right--but I think I spoke too soon. The AP story ran on Sunday, not Monday :http://www.masslive.com/newsflash/mass/index.ssf?/base/news-29/118453554239050.xml&storylist=massnews

July 17, 2007 9:11 PM
Chop Chop said:

OIC what you mean. I was going by the in a recent "article" link which pointed me to the globe AP article which was dated on the 16th. It's all-good! :) IMO - The fact that there is a minor uproar over such an inconsequential and explainable omission by the Associated Press speaks volumes to just how GOOD they must the rest of the time, but the critical scrutiny is valid nonetheless. I suppose overall the quality of news and its effectiveness with regards to the viewing public has diminished in some ways over time, especially TV news. However media commentators and internet-based media watchdogs and critics such as yourself, Dan Kennedy, Emily Rooney, etc. who scrutinize the news media -provide a closer look at the facts which are presented. Keep up the good work fighting the good fight! We definitely do not want to return to the days when the likes of Mr. Barnacle printed their columns and articles (allegedly spinning his articles out of whole cloth) without any fact-checking whatsoever.

July 18, 2007 12:28 AM