Important: Correction and clarification

by | 18/04/2016  23 Comments  [Jump to last]

ToffeeWeb would like to give notice of an important correction to a news item that we published earlier today regarding Muhamed Besic's most recent media comments, one that was unintentionally misleading to a large degree.

It has been pointed out to us that there was a vital discrepancy in a key quote attributed to Besic between a Press Association article on MailOnline and what was quoted elsewhere in outlets like the Liverpool Echo, possibly the original source. (Emphasis in each of the following quotes below is ToffeeWeb's.)

"That is the difference maybe this season in that we are afraid to play at home because we feel maybe it is better to defend and play on the counter." [MailOnline]

"That is maybe the difference this season not that we are afraid to play at home." [Liverpool Echo]

The original headline of the article that was run on ToffeeWeb, “Besic admits Goodison fear factor but eyes cup glory” was, unfortunately, partly based on the first quote in the PA/MailOnline article.

That was then compounded by a second error, namely the mistaken inclusion of a sentence written by the author of the PA piece describing how, “There is little positivity from the crowd and any mistake is greeted with groans.” This potentially damaging quote was erroneously attributed to Besic in our article and has since been removed.

We are aware of the important role and responsibility that ToffeeWeb has as a provider, aggregator and, sometimes, creator of news. While our status as an independent fan website means that we are never 100% free of bias, we do make every effort to be as fair and accurate as possible in our news reportage and we would never knowingly or deliberately set out to mislead in this way.

We would like to correct the above inaccuracies and apologise, both to our readers and Muhamed Besic himself, for the oversight and lack of accuracy reflected in the original piece.


Reader Comments (23)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer

Stephen Scofield
1 Posted 18/04/2016 at 17:04:29
I think the original one was much more accurate.
Brent Stephens
2 Posted 18/04/2016 at 17:14:24
As I posted on the original thread "Well spotted Steve Richards. Gracious response from Lyndon. So much for the outrage in earlier posts – mine included!" Sorry, Mo!
Don Alexander
3 Posted 18/04/2016 at 17:45:27
Was the discrepancy spotted within TW or did someone from the club point it out? If it's the latter it's encouraging to see we're being read "in-house".
Mark Tanton
4 Posted 18/04/2016 at 17:50:54
Uh oh, so now we know how Leighton feels.
Martin O'Sullivan
5 Posted 18/04/2016 at 17:52:15
The clubs PR people will have to read all papers, web posts etc. looking for liable or inaccurate stuff that could adversely effect the club, so they probably do see everything, it's just a shame they don't see Martinez as a PR threat to the club. Lol.
Ian Burns
6 Posted 18/04/2016 at 17:54:02
Good point, Don – maybe TW is being read and maybe it is making an impact... who knows?

Magnanimous of TW/Lyndon to print this apology – if only RM could show the same attitude towards the supporters.

Lyndon Lloyd
7 Posted 18/04/2016 at 17:55:23
Don (3), both the discrepancy between the two quotes and the mistaken attribution were spotted by a reader.

But I assure you, in case there's an assumption we were pressured into issuing the correction, if a mistake is made on this website, I/we will apologise for it and make the necessary corrections in good conscience and in the need for transparency without needing to be compelled to do so.

David Barks
8 Posted 18/04/2016 at 18:02:23
Christ, some of you must be stuck in an Orwell novel. A mistake was made, someone pointed it out, the correction was made. It really can be that simple, not everything has to be a Machiavellian conspiracy.
Don Alexander
9 Posted 18/04/2016 at 19:25:07
Thanks Lyndon. I know and respect the standards you uphold. For what it's worth I'd be amazed if someone at the club is not delegated to read TW but who knows?
Colin Glassar
10 Posted 18/04/2016 at 19:26:43
Always supported Mo. He's having a rough time just now but I think the lad will be a star... if he stays injury free.
Tony McNulty
11 Posted 18/04/2016 at 19:43:38
There is so much misleading twaddle published all over the place that it is excellent to see TW taking time out to pick up on any of its own inaccuracies, however small and insignificant.

Hats off once again to Lyndon and Michael who continue to provide us all with such an excellent platform for discussing all things Everton. I am probably not alone in taking you guys for granted most of the time.

(Turns into RM): Indeed you display an outstandin' talen' which we have no seen since in the journalistic world since its discovery many years ago. The talen' that you have is (trails off, no-one is listening any more) ...

Michael Kenrick
13 Posted 18/04/2016 at 19:51:07
There's an interesting lesson in this regarding the ways of 'Journalism'. When we see them using quotes, we automatically assume that is what was said, verbatim.

Clearly the journalist, or the sub-editor, or who knows, has the 'liberty' to amend/edit the quote or, I supect, recreate it from notes... although surely now they all use voice recorders??

Perhaps one of our journalist readers can explain how the same person can generate different quotes in the press without those words being deliberately (or for editorial reasons) altered?

Ged Simpson
14 Posted 18/04/2016 at 20:01:08
Michael, in the training of newspaper journos (NCTJ), it is the worst thing to misquote. But many are ambitious and soon throw that away for career advancement.

In the end, the industry is completely rotten and as the so-called 4th estate, they are untouchable.
Geoff Williams
15 Posted 18/04/2016 at 21:31:00
What has the truth got to do with a good story?
Jim Jennings
16 Posted 18/04/2016 at 21:34:41
Sorry to point it out but there's another mistake in this article.

"We are aware of the important role and responsibility that ToffeeWeb has as a provider, aggregator and, sometimes, creator of news."

The word "aggravator" has been misspelt as "aggregator"! ;-)

Michael Spear
17 Posted 18/04/2016 at 21:38:21
Michael (13), as a former journalist and editor I can assure you that no journalist or sub-editor has licence to use "quote" marks around anything other than what was actually said by the person quoted. The quote may be amended or edited slightly to make it more intelligible or acceptable, such as some papers' use of asterisks to protect sensitive souls from the odd obscenity (like the Daily M*** for example), but under no circumstances can quotes be made up.

All credit to you and Lyndon (7) for responding so quickly to what my publisher used to call "a short and curly job", to which there's no answer but to apologise for the mistake.

Mind you, there are some people's quotes you just couldn't make up even if you tried... and Martinez doesn't half try.

Jamie Crowley
18 Posted 18/04/2016 at 22:55:02
As a "re-distributor" of news stories (in the main, sans the articles and submissions) ToffeeWeb can only re-publish stories that appear in media publications and outlets.

That surely means they can't be held culpable for any misquotes or misleading information they "re-post" from other news outlets.

But it sure shows a hell of a lot of class and journalistic integrity when they independently correct misquotes picked up "off the wire" from other outlets.

Dermot O'Brien
19 Posted 18/04/2016 at 23:14:48
David #8, you must be one of them......
Lyndon Lloyd
20 Posted 18/04/2016 at 23:43:33
Michael K (13): "When we see them using quotes, we automatically assume that is what was said, verbatim."

As Michael S.and Ged's responses above show, I think we're entitled to assume that the quotes are either verbatim or so close as not to change the meaning.

That was at the root of the whole flap over Leighton Baines's "chemistry" controversy – Martinez insisted the player had been misquoted or that his comments had been taken out of context but the Echo produced the transcript to prove the quotes were correct.

We don't have access to the raw quotes so we're at the mercy of those news outlets that do and, in this instance, I got burned by trusting the authenticity of the PA's report.

Jamie (18), as I mentioned in a comment below my article in question, I wasn't aware that the original quote had been taken off the Echo's site which is what I'm waiting to verify. Given the choice between the Mail and the Echo, I'm far more trusting of the latter – they get a rough ride by some fans but I stand by them when it comes to integrity – but, again, the Mail's piece was under a Press Association byline which should be a different story.

Eric Myles
21 Posted 19/04/2016 at 03:27:45
Have the Mail published a correction and apology also??
Teddy Bertin
22 Posted 19/04/2016 at 11:18:17
Good job, TW!
Paul Thompson
23 Posted 19/04/2016 at 11:36:17
Of all the journalistic territories most likely to be distorted by pressure to mislead celebrity 'news' and football are the two most likely. This is particularly the case in on-line pieces, where media outlets gain revenue from readers clicking through to the story. There was a very good piece in the Guardian media pages yesterday about this problem of misleading and made-up items known as 'clickbait'.

How newsroom pressure is letting fake stories on to the web

Kevin Lovelady
24 Posted 19/04/2016 at 17:18:58
If the spirit was willing and resources allowed, it would be relatively easy technically speaking for Lyndon/the team to get some reverse-IP lookup technology on the site to see if anyone from GP was trawling the TW site.

At a push you may even be able to tell if Bobby Boy was 'echando un ojazo' every now and then!

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.

About these ads

© ToffeeWeb