Semi-Props To Ms. Alvarez of the NY Times; Mockery For Their Editors

Yesterday Lizette Alvarez triggered a bit of a reader revolt in the comments to her website story which included a brief summary of the Trayvon Martin shooting, and I joined in from this post.

Today, Ms. Alvarez has expanded and corrected the summary, so now cranks like me ought to acknowledge her effort and responsiveness.  It's nice to see the Times focusing on the truth and responding to the concerns of all their readers across the political spectrum.  Weird, but nice.  [In an UPDATE we learn that we have less company in reading the Times than we imagined - Times editors are ignoring their own reporting. Maybe the cranks and critics are the last remaining audience.]

Less weird, in this age of web journalism where stories are never final, is that the Times has flushed the old story and re-linked to the expanded, corrected version.  Folks who wonder if the Times was originally wrong can see my excerpt from yesterday commemorated in this screenshot of the Times archive search.

The expanded story now reads as follows:

In this case, Mr. Zimmerman, who had founded a neighborhood watch over the summer after a string of burglaries in the area, saw Mr. Martin, began following him, and called 911, telling the dispatcher that he appeared “suspicious.”

The dispatcher asked if Mr. Zimmerman was following him. “Yeah,” Mr. Zimmerman said.

“O.K.., we don’t need you to do that,” the dispatcher said. Mr. Zimmerman said: “O.K.”

The case will probably hinge on what happened next.

Much better. And if the cranks and critics did in fact contribute to improving a first draft, well, we will use this newfound power wisely. I hope. After we catch our breath.

We have lots to cover and more to come, so away we go - in the next post we Stand Our Ground!

UPDATE: It's two papers in one! Times editors don't read their own paper or follow their own links, which is interesting to learn - why are we taking their reporting seriously if they don't?

From their editorial today lauding the decision to charge George Zimmerman:

In this case, Mr. Zimmerman exited his car to follow the teenager despite a 911 dispatcher’s warning: “We don’t need you to do that.”

I urge them to read their current coverage.  Or, I urge them to read the link they provided, to a March 20 story by Ms. Alvarez:

In the 911 call, Mr. Zimmerman, using an expletive and speaking of Trayvon, said they “always get away.” The 911 dispatcher told him not to get out of the car and said the police were on their way. Mr. Zimmerman was already outside. A dispute began. Mr. Zimmerman told the police that Trayvon attacked him and that he fired in self-defense.

She was right then, she is right now, and I don't know where the editors of the Paper of Record are getting their "news".

PILING ON: They aren't getting their news from their own exhaustive April 1 study of the case:

Mr. Zimmerman told the dispatcher that the hooded figure was now running. He jumped out of his car to follow him, the beep-beep of his car, as recorded on the 911 call, announcing the instant that he moved beyond his understood mandate as neighborhood watch coordinator.

The wind could be heard whooshing through Mr. Zimmerman’s cellphone as he tried to keep the visitor in view. Also heard is a garbled epithet that some have interpreted to be a racial slur, though his father insisted that his son would never say anything like that. Dispatcher: “Are you following him?”

Mr. Zimmerman: “Yeah.”

Dispatcher: “O.K., we don’t need you to do that.”

Mr. Zimmerman: “O.K.”

He and the dispatcher arranged for Mr. Zimmerman to meet a police officer near the mailboxes at the development’s clubhouse, and the call ended with a “thank you” and a “you’re welcome.”

Some of what happened next, along a poorly lighted path that runs between the back ends of two long rows of town houses, is lost to the night.

Comments

[centralcal]

Good morning. I guess.

[narciso]

Ok, I hit my limit on Times articles, but is what Liz Alvarez saying actually true, aboutthe Neighborhood watch, OT, Treacher having some fun with Hilary Rosen and the Mole at Fox

[DebinNC]

In the explanded story Michael Cooper was added to the byline. Maybe he's Ms. Alvarez' new factchecker.

[Cecil Turner]

The case will probably hinge on what happened next.

Not likely. The case hinges on whether a judge has the cojones to dismiss the case based on a pretrial motion of immunity brought by Zimmerman . . . with the mob's howling echoing in his ears. (I'm betting on high-minded noises about how taking the case from the jury would be inappropriate.)

Then, the case will be argued in front of 12 unemployed people too stupid to find a plausible excuse to avoid a drawn-out trial. They'll spend weeks on the fawning family and earwitnesses deploring what happened to sweet young Trayvon . . . and five minutes on the self-defense claim. He's forked.

(Hey, what can I say? I'm cynical before my second cup of coffee.)

[OldTimer]

OT/ I could be encouraged at the Romney campaign's zippy-quick push-back against the forces of evil. My worry has been all along that they would go soft on the Axelturfers, forgetting all the strong-arm tactics they used against their own.

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/after-insult-romney-hits-back-lighting-speed/476496

[narciso]

I'm suspecting there's something in the watercooler at SDK Knickerbocker, that encourages that much stupidity, brain slugs
are my best bet.

[Clarice]

Today, Trayvon's mother says she thinks it was an accident--where the hell was she when the lynch mob was marching and Sharpton and Jackson and the NBPP were doing their thang?

[Captain Hate]

Speaking of brain slugs:
http://is.gd/V8oPSJ

[GMAX]

An accident? Then it aint murder. Most that could be is manslaughter. Forgetting about provisions in the law for stand your ground etc. No malice in an accident.

[centralcal]

Agree, Clarice. And what about her own attorneys?

[Chubby]

well done, TM.

guess the days are long gone when all the legacy media did was publish stories about bloggers lacking requisite credentials

[narciso]

He's this close from going Captain Terrill and
disrupting himself, and to think they gave him
a third term and not Guiliani

[Cecil Turner]

An accident? Then it aint murder.

Best of all, it isn't self-defense, and civil immunity does not apply. [Oh, you cynic!]

[Captain Hate]

Treacher having some fun with Hilary Rosen

Even the DNC knows she stepped in it badly. OWN IT CLOWNS!!!

[Clarice]

The Democrat war on (traditional) women

[narciso]

Vizzini, would have counseled them, 'don't go against Sicilians when revenge is on the line'
and don't ever challenge motherhood, you twit.
although Captain could come up with a stronger
expression,

[MarkO]

I wish I could see a judge dismissing these charges, assuming there is a failure of evidence, but my reading of the forces at work in the wider Orlando progressive suburbs suggests it will not happen.

[Captain Hate]

narc, have you been posting @ AoS as Cthulu in the past few days?

[fdcol63]

Did anyone else who listened to Zimmerman's call ever hear the dispatcher tell him not to get out of the car?

All I heard was the dispatcher say "We don't need you to do that" when GZ said he was following TM.

[Extraneus]

Just more MSM dishonesty, fd, as I know you know. We learned a week ago that the dispatcher cannot give orders, never mind the fact that she didn't.

[fdcol63]

Ext, I know that when I was a police dispatcher and 911 operator, my "instructions" were never treated as legally binding orders.

[Tom Maguire]

In the explanded story Michael Cooper was added to the byline.

True.

Then, the case will be argued in front of 12 unemployed people too stupid to find a plausible excuse to avoid a drawn-out trial.

Also too out of touch to have noticed the passing coverage on television.

Did anyone else who listened to Zimmerman's call ever hear the dispatcher tell him not to get out of the car?

In context I knew what she meant and it seemed like a clear-enough summary.

[jimmyk]

She was right then, she is right now, and I don't know where the editors of the Paper of Record are getting their "news".

bubu should apply for a job with the Times, he seems to have the requisite inability to absorb information that is in discord with his fetid imagination. Ditto for duda and sylvia.

[narciso]

'It's a Floor wax, and a dessert topping' Smith always had that problem with cross referencing contradictory data at the Ministry of Truth.

[Christopher Fotos]

The photos I'm seeing with the linked Alvarez/Cooper story still use the outdated young-teen image of Martin.

[NK]

What's the NY Times?

[Walter Sobchak]

"[NY]Times editors don't read their own paper or follow their own links"

Why should they? They know that it is junk.

[daddy]

"[NY]Times editors don't read their own paper or follow their own links"

They're not in the News Business. They're in the propaganda and cultural wars business.

Cecil,

Sadly, I share your cynicism in your 9:38.

[Vinny B.]

What I don't get is why no one is talking about hoe the NRA and the Republican Party are bankrolling Zimmerman's defense. What makes him do special? Oh yeah, he is a white man culling the streets of the trouble-making black kid, so they want to make sure he gets away with it. It is sad that black youths in our society are targeted by whites and scapegoated. You know who I blame the most for the attitudes of hate like that shown by Zimmerman? George W. Bush. he told Americans for years that it was OK to hate those darky Ay-rabs, so why wouldn't Zimmerman think it was OK to kill a young minority who he considered a terrorist simply because he was black. Just listen how he called Martin a "coon" and couldn't wait to point out that he was black and therefore a criminal that deserved to die. I hope he gets the death penalty for what he did.

[Russ]

" why are we taking their reporting seriously if they don't?"

Wait. What? We are? Crap, I must have missed a memo or something...

[Daniel in Brookline]

Vinny:

Just about pitch perfect. Racism? Check. Blame it on Bush? Check. Completely misrepresenting the facts (e.g. "coon", which he didn't say and would have been totally incongruous) - check. Making up irrelevant facts that don't help your argument (when did GWB *ever* say "darky Ay-rabs", let alone encourage hatred of them) - check.

You forgot to call someone a Nazi, though. Add that and it'll be perfect. Half credit if you say "homophobe" instead. Extra credit if you call someone a gay Nazi homophobe.

Happy trails,
DiB