The New York Times Got It Wrong, But FBI Wouldn’t Correct It
It was a common scene across America on June 8. At offices, coffee shops, bars and in homes, people gathered to watch former FBI director James Comey testify on television during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.
We couldn’t help but be struck by one particular revelation: Asked about the state of the public’s knowledge surrounding a potential investigation into Russian links to members of President Donald Trump’s election team, Comey disputed the veracity of an article published Feb. 14 by the New York Times that alleged that “members of Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election.”
Information that was cited by the newspaper as corroborative was pulled from sources not directly briefed on the matter, Comey said, making the story speculative. The newspaper said it sourced the information from four “current and former American officials,” who spoke off the record to maintain anonymity.
Information that was cited by the Times as corroborative was pulled from sources not directly briefed on the matter, Comey said, making the story speculative.
In a recent Times article about Comey’s remarks related to the February story, reporters Michael S. Schmidt, Mark Mazzetti, and Matt Apuzzo noted that Comey testified that “there were inaccuracies in many articles about the F.B.I.’s Russia investigation, a problem he attributed in part to anonymous sources discussing classified information.”
In a Congressional testimony on March 20, Comey said something similar, according to the Wall Street Journal.
“Often times it doesn’t come from the people who actually know the secrets,” Comey said, referring to leaked information. “It comes from one hop out, people who heard about it or were told about it. And that’s the reason so much information that reports to be accurate classified information is actually wrong in the media.’”
“Often times it doesn’t come from the people who actually know the secrets. It comes from one hop out, people who heard about it or were told about it. And that’s the reason so much information that reports to be accurate classified information is actually wrong in the media.” — Former FBI Director James Comey
What’s more, Comey said the Feb. 14 New York Time story could not be publically refuted without jeopardizing ongoing investigations.
“We don’t call the press to say, ‘Hey, you got that thing wrong about this sensitive topic.’ We just have to leave it there,” he said.
While Comey didn’t say exactly what was incorrect about the Feb. 14 article, there’s little doubt that increasing reliance on unidentified sources has eroded public confidence in the news media.
Independent validation of stories may be the key to avoiding future errors and omissions.
Firstly, if a writer knows that his work will be checked by several independent, anonymous reviewers, he will be less inclined to include unsubstantiated information. Secondly, unfamiliar, anonymous reviewers are more likely to use critical, fact-based judgement than when a story is evaluated by a group of familiar editors.
Our primary focus at Decentralized News Network is to create a platform that curates and enforces factual news by way of community moderation. By crowdsourcing the reviewing and approval of articles, we remove the central point of control where bias can play a part in whether unsubstantiated claims are published.
By removing the central point of control in the journalism review process, DNN removes bias in determining what is published.
When news is generated and self-moderated by a committed group of citizen journalists, we believe we will find truth in reporting.
Our demo launches soon, until then, join us on Slack, Bitcointalk, and telegram.
