I just received the following email:
date Jan 19, 2007 1:17 PM
subject your incorrect blog entry
It has come to my attention that you have erroneously claimed todfay that Ipicked the Patriots to defeat the Colts on MSNBC’s website. I have received several e-mails asking about this and informed them, as I am you, that no such pick was ever made. My pick in both the Globe and in several other public forums was, and remains, the Colts in what I believe will be a close
I was asked to write a column on the Patriots’ take on this game and to answer the question of whether or not they were good enough to return to the Super Bowl this year, which they are. So are (or in some cases were) several other teams now on the sidelines as well as the four still playing.
I did as requested and certainly anyone like yourself could make a strong case for New England winning Sunday and advancing to Super Bowl XLI. However, I just re-read the article on MSNBC to see where I might have “picked the Patriots,” as you have written. No where did I do any such thing. That was not a prediction column, as any media analyst like yourself would surely know. Iit was a column in which I was asked to answer how, and if, they could advance and how the two sides felt about it.
While I would agree that the headline was misleading and has since been changed after I spoke with editors out there, for you, a self-proclaimed media watchdog, not to know the writer has nothing to do with the headline on a story calls into question in the simplest way your fitness to criticize the media. Worse, to have read that article and then to claim a prediction was made was beyond misleading. It was false and, as you often do, misread what was written and mislead your constituencyHow does “may make them good enough” become a prediction of their winning the game? how does, “that does not mean it’s a given they can do it again” become a prediction they will win the game? How does “unless they (the Colts) lost to them” become a prediction that they will lose the game? how does, “there are 53 guys in New England (which as I’m sure you know is their roster) who believe” become Ron Borges’ believes?
I assume, as the fair-minded man you purport yourself to be, you will immediately write a retraction of your earlier remarks so that your readers are not mislead by you.
The MSNBC piece headline for the article below has been changed to reflect the fact that the article is not a prediction, but instead analysis, with no actual prediction being made within the article.
However, the slant of the article is clearly in the favor of the Patriots. The average reader would come away from this piece with the conclusion that the author is picking the Patriots. The original headline reflected that, and while the writer doesn’t compose the headlines, they’re based on the feel of the article. In this case, Borges certainly fooled the headline writer and many others into thinking he was picking the Patriots Sunday. Read the MSNBC article again and see what you think.
However, I’ll retract the statement that Ron Borges picked both sides this week. I was wrong. That’s the bottom line. My bad.
I’m also glad to see that Borges is very concerned about misleading readers.
Actually, my intern was wrong. Yeah.
Listen to The Big Show’s take on the Ron Borges MSNBC article.