He examines and responds to comments and complaints about the Globe's news and editorial content, and keeps the Globe staff aware of feedback.

E-mail him at ombud@globe.com or call (617) 929-3020. To leave a recorded message, call(617)929-3022

Stay in touch

Subscripe to this feed  

Add to My Yahoo  

Archives

The readers speak

I've received many comments from readers in response to my last column on Sunday (1/15) regarding the Globe's errors and corrections for 2005.

I'm going to post some of the emails I received so that other readers can see what was said. I will also include some of these comments in the weekly internal report that I produce for all Globe journalists and executives where I compile the highlights of feedback from Globe readers on a variety of topics.

Since the Globe doesn't provide space to publish letters to the ombudsman, I will use this space on a regular basis to print some letters from readers.

Here's a sampling of comments received this week to the corrections column. You can see that column by clicking the link on the left side of this page.

Your explanations for the decrease in the number of corrections in 2005 from 2004 missed the glaringly obvious explanation: there were fewer corrections because you published fewer articles. If you had published the same number of articles in 2005 as you did in 2004, and if you experienced the same rate of corrections on the additional articles in 2005 as you did on the ones you actually published, the number of corrections would have actually increased to 1040.
In any case, I would suggest to you that the difference in the number of corrections is so small as to be meaningless.
Michael Miller
ISOM Department
Suffolk University

When you say the Globe published 57,893 stories in 2005, are you including copies of stories from other sources such as The A.P., as opposed to just written by the Globe staff. This would change the percentage of corrections to the number of actual Globe stories and make your analogy misleading at best.
Dick Brown.

Good point, but yes, the figure includes all stories - by Globe reporters and wire services. For example, there were 18 errors in the Globe that were attributed to Associated Press stories, according to Tuite's report.

You recently detailed mistakes in reporting, but did not mention the paper's increasing failure to detect mistakes in grammar and English usage. Perhaps you may wish to also include such "mistakes" in your next update.
Thank you for this consideration.
Jules Baum, M.D.

Regarding your column on Sunday regarding corrections, I have two suggestions that I think would help the Globe.
I regularly check the corrections in the print copy on page 2, and find it very helpful. However, the Globe does not always repeat the incorrect/orignal reporting. It would be much better to re-educate the reader by stating the mistake and then correcting it. By just listing the correction you're not always aware of what is being retracted.
I also read the Globe online and didn't realize until your column that corrections are linked to the article online. However, that doesn't help if you already read the article - why would you go back and read it again. That's why having all the day's (week's?)corrections listed together would improve the Globe's accuracy online - just like the page 2 column in print.
I would like to see the Globe always repeat the mistake in the corrections column, and have a separate corrections section online.
Thanks,
Mitchell Rose

Boston.com offers a pretty comprehensive view of the Globe's corrections. You can see
those corrections here.

There were so many errors made in 2005 that I must conclude multiple errors are commonplace for all newspapers. What you accomplished in your piece was little more than bringing attention to this fact, while convincing the innocent (and boring the rest), that your paper is uniquely contrite for something all newspapers (and human beings) do. How self-serving to gloss over the damage done during this “confession.” Don’t bother!! How about taking real responsibility? If you really wanted to reveal something unique, interesting, and useful, you could have singled out the most egregious, damaging errors, who was responsible, and how much effort the Globe expended to correct them and the damage they did.
Jack Bukowski
Marlborough, MA

I thought you might appreciate this statistic. If the United States Post Office sustained the same error rate as the Globe (a rate which you seem to consider not particularly alarming) in the performance of its duties, it would have incorrectly delivered 3,723,318,339 pieces of mail last year. As the Post Office is one arguably one of the most maligned institutions in US, perhaps your seeming complacency is a bit naïve.
Warren Unck