Rachel Kleinfeld will probably agree to that.
I read about this, but never saw the original story from Reuters.
I assume that the original version mentioning Groyper is a true version.
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace is not a right leaning organization.
Rachel Kleinfeld
@RachelKleinfeld
·
Sep 17
A Reuters reporter misquoted me in a story about Charlie Kirk’s murder, putting words in my mouth that pointed a finger at a particular group as responsible. The reporters had mixed up their own notes with my quote and reported what they had found elsewhere as words I had said.
Rachel Kleinfeld
@RachelKleinfeld
·
Sep 17
I never mentioned a specific group or movement to Reuters or any reporter – I do not study specific groups and so don’t comment on them. I would also not speculate about something as serious as who committed a murder.
Rachel Kleinfeld
@RachelKleinfeld
·
Sep 17
Reuters realized what had happened and tried to simply change the quote without admitting reporter error, like a five-year-old who broke mom’s vase and tries to hide the damage.
Rachel Kleinfeld
@RachelKleinfeld
·
Sep 17
When I learned what had happened, I & the Carnegie Endowment where I work attempted to get Reuters – and other outlets that had by then quoted the original misquote - to print a formal retraction admitting that they had misquoted me. They eventually did, but far, far too slowly.
Rachel Kleinfeld
@RachelKleinfeld
·
Sep 17
Meanwhile, I was getting hateful messages from people who read the misquote and others who thought there was a cover up. And then the Foundation for Freedom Online made allegations that my institution, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace as supporting censorship.
Rachel Kleinfeld
@RachelKleinfeld
·
Sep 17
They noted that “It is considered good journalistic practice, when a news website makes a clarification, correction, or any other substantial change to its initial report, for the authors to include a note informing readers that a change has been made.” I very much agree.
Rachel Kleinfeld
@RachelKleinfeld
·
Sep 17
Then they wrote, correctly at the time but not now, that: “No such note can be found in Reuters’ report, making the edit look more like an attempt to cover up misinformation than an honest correction” and inferred the rest of their story.
Rachel Kleinfeld
@RachelKleinfeld
·
Sep 17
I am FURIOUS at that reporter in Reuters and their editorial slowness in printing a retraction, which they should have done immediately.
RecentWTF happened to the WTF h... by alum74
Hey Tempo! #23Illini Home... by ThePAMan
Let's talk about somethin...
by murphstahoe 
Total Members: 141