USA Today: "Some Individuals Quoted … Appeared to Be Fabricated"

From today's USA Today:

After receiving an external correction request, USA TODAY audited the reporting work of Gabriela Miranda. The audit revealed that some individuals quoted were not affiliated with the organizations claimed and appeared to be fabricated. The existence of other individuals quoted could not be independently verified. In addition, some stories included quotes that should have been credited to others.

As a result, USA TODAY removed 23 articles from its website and other platforms for not meeting our editorial standards. The headlines of the articles are listed below [see here]. Miranda has resigned ….

Thanks to Stephen Green (at InstaPundit) for the pointer.

Comments

[AmosArch]

Most news these days is fabricated to a certain extent. You just need to cover your bases well enough.

[Sebastian Cremmington]

The election was stolen…the 2000 election.

[Don Nico]

Get off this hobby horse of yours.

[DaivdBehar]

No outlet is complying with the journalism Code of Ethics save C-SPAN. It requires publishing all sides of a story. All media are the David Duke website, hate speech, propaganda outlets for the feelings of their tech billionaire owners. I have never met anyone who was quoted or covered in an article who thought it was fair or accurate. They are all garbage.

There are 2 people lower in morals than the vile toxic lawyer. One is a serial rapist and murderer of children. The other is the journalist.

[DaivdBehar]

The Establishment Clause immunizes one of the best scams ever. Give us your money now, you will be rewarded after your death.

The Free Press Clause immunizes hate filled immature jerks, attacking our way of life to bring eye balls to the advertisers, and for no other purpose. They are almost all Democrat attack dogs.

[DaivdBehar]

As with most Democrats, hired from the Ugly Model Agency.

[Mr. Bumble]

I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you!

[AmosArch]

She should put the fact that she has multiple falsified articles on her resume and send them into CNN WAPOO et al.

[bernard11]

Actually, she should have a future in RW media - that's where being a liar really pays off.

[Life of Brian]

Actually, she should have a future in RW media - that's where being a liar really pays off.

Wow, that's the worst misspelling of "yo momma" I've seen in ages.

[Jimmy the Dane]

These are the people we are supposed to trust when they say there is no way, absolutely no way the 2020 election was rigged...

[Longtobefree]

No, they are not.

[David Nieporent]

Or you could believe all the Republicans, including Trump officials like Bill Barr, who tell you that.

[Life of Brian]

Is this some sort of extension of the old, tired "Liz Cheney is a REPUBLICAN, yo" theory?

[Sarcastr0]

If your conspiracy against Trump contains all Democrats and a bunch of Republicans, including many who directly worked for him, maybe it's not a conspiracy.

[Life of Brian]

Well, there you go again. Even setting aside the question of which ones may be testifying under duress, I suspect we'd all have a nice laugh over your extreme torture of the words "bunch" and "many" if you actually listed the people in question.

[not guilty]

Do you have any evidence of duress, or are you once again talking out your ass?

[Life of Brian]

Huh -- I guess you yourself are not willing to set duress aside to address the point I actually made. Can't imagine why.

[Sarcastr0]

Dude, you're the one making a presumption in order to ignore the pretty damming testimony that Trump knew he lost the election, or is so delusional he can't be allowed to have any further position of any responsibility.

[Life of Brian]

Oh, is this Mr. Bunch-and-Many back with a new distraction? How cute.

[not guilty]

Life of Brian, do you question William Barr's Republican bona fides? He has said that he will vote for Trump if he is nominated in 2024, which in light of his recognition of Trump's perfidy, can logically be attributed only to GOP partisanship.

[Life of Brian]

He has said that he will vote for Trump if he is nominated in 2024, which in light of his recognition of Trump's perfidy

Interesting. If he really said all that, how do we usually view a witness that takes multiple highly contradictory positions?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Profs. Volokh and Eastman seem tight.

They're both disaffected wingnuts.

West coast, Federalist Society law professors.

Cranky culture war casualties.

Prof. Volokh regularly describes his gig work.

Prof. Volokh has vouched for and endorsed Prof. Eastman.

Did Prof. Volokh advise Prof. Eastman with respect to the attempt to subvert an American election?

Did Prof. Eastman consult Prof. Volokh with respect to seeking a pardon for un-American conduct?

Did Prof. Volokh advise Prof. Eastman with respect to criminal liability issues, or assist Prof. Eastman with respect to invocation of Fifth Amendment privilege a hundred times or more?

This might explain Prof. Volokh's ostentatious silence with respect to these issues (while he posts avidly with respect to comparatively paltry matters). It wouldn't be a great explanation -- complicity in un-American and perhaps criminal conduct -- but it would be better than the pure cowardice and lack of character that are the current leading candidates.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I should add that Prof. Eastman may no longer be a law professor (just as he may not much longer have a law license).

I vaguely recall that he and his academic employer parted ways consequent to (former?) Prof. Eastman's ragged disgrace.

[kkoshkin]

The Internet persona you choose to convey is . . . bizarre.

[David Nieporent]

Kirkland is just a sad troll desperate for attention.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

In the world in which right-wing bigots have the better ideas and are going to prevail in America, I -- with the rest of the victorious liberal-libertarian mainstream -- constitute the troll at the fringe.

The reality-based, modern American world seems more than the Volokh Conspiracy and its fans can abide.

[Jerry B.]

C’mon, Rev. Put a “clinger” in there somewhere so I can have a shot of booze.

[FivebySixThree]

Between him, David, and the Queen, my comment stream is nearly grayed out.

had to take action because my drinking game was going to do me in

these comments are so much better when you mute the noise

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

If pure, unadulterated, delusional right-wing bluster, bigotry, and backwardness is what you prefer, the Volokh Conspiracy and its comments (with the few liberal-libertarian commenters muted) is the best thing this side of One America, Stormfront, and the Crusader!

[Jimmy the Dane]

He isn't going to like the future very much....

[DaivdBehar]

Hi, Rev. Still looking for the slightest evidence in your utterances you ever attended a law school, let alone a Top Tier one.

[not guilty]

Eastman has been under disciplinary investigation by the State Bar of California since September 2021 for his conduct in relation to the November 2020 presidential election. https://www.calbar.ca.gov/About-Us/News/News-Releases/state-bar-announces-john-eastman-ethics-investigation
I wonder if the disciplinary authorities will consider his email to Giuliani stating “I’ve decided that I should be on the pardon list, if that is still in the works,”

[Sidney r finkel]

No doubt Miranda has already secured a position as a spokesperson for Donald Trump or a news reporter on Fox or a person Steve Bannon uses as a source.

In fact the fabrications were probably deliberately done to secure one of those positions.

[Bob from Ohio]

I think you meant Joe Biden and MSNBC and Jen Psaki.

[Mr. Bumble]

...or the Jan. 6 committee. Or Nancy Pelosi. Or Chuck Schumer. Or Adam Schitt. Or Liz Cheny.

[Mr. Bumble]

By the way Sidney, your post is an example of "projection"

[Sidney r finkel]

And if I knew what that meant I would have a very snappy reply.

[DaivdBehar]

Syd, baby. Miranda is a hate filled Democrat. You need to own her. What Democrat hate most is America. They are owned by the tech billionaires. Those are kowtowing to the Chinese Commie Party for access to its market, to enrich themselves at our expense. They are traitors. The Democrat Party is their hate outlet. Their assets should be seized in civil forfeiture for treason. Defund the tech billionaires, the Democrat Party is dissolved.

[David Nieporent]

The list of articles makes clear that there was no political valence to this reporter's seeming malfeasance. This was just laziness or whatever.

[David Nieporent]

Sigh. I posted that comment immediately upon reading the linked story. Then I read the comment thread. Ugh. Of course people just immediately jumped to partisan talking points.

(Actually, talking points is too strong; this is simply partisan taunting.)

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

If you can't mock and scorn disaffected, bigoted, delusional, right-wing culture war losers, where is the fun in any of this?

[DaivdBehar]

Hi, Rev. Can you tell the class where you went to law school? Your comments never show the slightest evidence of legal training. Are you making a living as a lawyer?

[Jerry B.]

Want partisan? Look at the WAPO story about Montana’s Governor being out of the state when the recent flooding occurred.

[avb]

They feel like low quality articles. A few listicles and some barely better. Cinco de Mayo in USA VS. Mexico, Friendsgiving, Zoom life, etc.

I got a laugh that she wrote an article about someone suggesting urine as a COVID-19 treatment, but the article was removed because of her fraud.

[Bored Lawyer]

It was not laziness or whatever. It was rank dishonesty. Even if the motivation was no partisan.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Ceaselessly nipping at mainstream heels and ankles appears to be just about the only thing right-wing legal academia has left.

This bugs you, but nothing to say about Prof. Eastman's misconduct and Ginni Thomas' antics, Conspirators?

Do you still wonder why your colleagues at mainstream law schools wish you would find your natural place at Ave Maria, Regent, Notre Dame, South Texas, or Liberty?

Try to show some character or courage. It might do you some good.

[Flight-ER-Doc]

How many other 'journalists' could survive similar scrutiny?

[santamonica811]

Almost all.

Any other questions that are stumping you, doc?

[I Callahan]

Almost all? Hah!! Got a cite to back that blanket statement?

[santamonica811]

Not sure what you're whining about. Just about all journalists write with integrity. Only a fool or an idiot would say "all" to any profession...there are, of course, always bad apples and bad actors.

ER Doc was confused about an issue and asked for an answer. You'll notice he did not ask for any cite. He asked a simple question and I was happy to provide the correct answer.

You're welcome.

[DaivdBehar]

Sannie. No journalist is complying with the Code of Ethics, requiring publishing all sides of a story. The only one is Brian Lamb. He counts stories to keep C-SPAN balanced.

[Finrod]

"Just about all journalists write with integrity."

This is the most unintentionally funny thing I've read this week.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Interesting, but inconsequential. Ms. Miranda's "beat" consisted of things like a wedding dance ban in D.C. and what TikTok is doing about an ice bucket challenge.

Nothing like what the New York Times did (with Judith Miller) to support the runup to the Iraq War. At least Ms. Miranda's future will not be haunted by thousands of deaths caused.

[FivebySixThree]

the take away for me is they got someone well before they got established enough to where people would be afraid to question their integrity.

it would be best if all news organizations published a periodic review of their journalist authenticity and accuracy.

[santamonica811]

I found this story rather reassuring. When we think of cases like this, or similar ones in various magazines and newspapers (and, to a different degree, on network and cable TV news), I think the various media do an excellent job of--when there's an allegation--quickly investigating, and if confirmed, getting the bad actor out of there lickety-split.

Compare this to other professions. How many clients does a lawyer have to defraud or hurt before she is punished? How many years will this take? Same for medical doctors...how many cases of malpractice? Hell, with your general contractor or plumber: how many screw-ups or frauds will it take before he loses his license? Or even loses his job?

For the most part; journalism depends on reputation. And, when a crooked journalist damages his employer's rep . . . well, don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.

And deservedly so. Nicely done, USA Today, on your quick and decisive actions; even though we (and you, obviously!) wish you'd caught the lies before publication.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Yes to this

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Journalism is noble work. People who don’t recognize this are low-quality, nearly worthless, stains along the road of progress.

[Sarcastr0]

Indeed.

The evil partisan media of the right's imagination would have covered this up.
The publication that does this in the open is neither lazy nor willing to cover something up out of shame.

When is the last time the Daily Mail had an audit like this and acted on it?

[Toranth]

Just to be clear Sarcastro, you think that USA Today is at the same level, and should be held to the same standards, as the Daily Mail?

[ah....Clem]

I think his point was exactly the opposite.

Anyway, time for a little entertainment: Dan & Dan with the Daily Mail Song

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eBT6OSr1TI

[Sarcastr0]

I think all news media should be held to a standard wherein they check their own work to make sure they aren't publishing lies.

[Sarcastr0]

But most of it doesn't even try. Hence the Mail is well below USA Today.

Do you disagree?

[ah....Clem]

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Daily_Mail

[Toranth]

The Daily Mail is basically a tabloid, a bare half-step up from the Weekly World News.

Which is why trying to support USA Today by comparing it to the Daily Mail is somewhat questionable.

[Toranth]

Gabriela Miranda was hired by USA today after graduation in May 2021. She was allowed to resign in June 2022 after an investigation revealed multiple fraudulent articles.

The oldest article discovered to be fraudulent? From May, 2021.

The standards at USA Today are so high that a new-grad hire is allowed to write articles with no review until a year later.
I wonder what portion of what she wrote for the Gainesville Times or a school paper at the University of Georgia are honest.

And no, not all of the articles she worked on were unimportant - she also worked on other articles, such as an extended series about the New York subway shooting and Frank James. I assume that USA Today reviewed her 'contributions' to those stories as well.

[Sarcastr0]

You are spinning a lot of assumptions here in service of...shitting on USA Today?

[Da5id]

Based on my infrequent reading, USA Today has never been a particularly high quality newspaper.

And it IS rather a bad look for a paper that a new reporter had so much slip through the cracks. It isn't totally unreasonable to expect better supervision of new employees. Budgets have no doubt made editorial supervision/checking of stories increasingly lax.

[Sarcastr0]

Yeah, sure, but I don't get Toranth spinning multiple speculations to say it sucks.

It's not really on my radar.

[Toranth]

"A lot of assumptions"? What "assumptions" or "speculations" did I make, Sarcastro? Are you putting words in my mouth again? Or do you think that USA Today is so incompetent that they did not review her contributions to other articles?

I am criticizing the editors/management of USA Today. A new graduate hire needs supervision in any industry. The fact that USA Today did not give the needed supervision reflects badly on them, the same way that fraud reflects badly on Miranda.

Are you claiming this is unreasonable?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Cheap shots and red meat;
the obsolete right-wing prof,
lathering his rubes

Carry on, clingers,
but just so far and so long
as betters permit

[DaivdBehar]

Hi, Rev. That was so lawyerly. Loved it.

[Mr. Bumble]

Does that apply to settled science?

[Jimmy the Dane]

Science is great to the left until it isn't. Follow the science (except ignore that genetic difference between those things we call "men" and "women" that is just a social construct made up to oppress people, chromosomes and DNA have absolutely nothing to do with it....)!!!!!!!

[DaivdBehar]

Great point, Queenie. So glad you brought it up. The scientists now think science is crap.

https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

It seems the medical hierarchy, Ivy indoctrinated scumbags just like the lawyer hierarchy, cut first day of high school statistics. Most studies violate the assumptions required of statistical testing. What do all these hierarchies have against their high school educations?

[Bored Lawyer]

"Science corrects itself" applies where someone either made a good faith mistake, or has obtained more data that indicates revision of one's theories.

This was blatant lying. Correction here requires the person be ostracized from the profession. The equivalent in science would be someone who fabricates data, which should cause the person to lose his job and all credibility.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

These are the kinds of people who think when science corrects itself it shows science is useless and unreliable.

And then there are the people who understand that Einstein's corrections to science were in good faith and Lysenko's were not and that politics do indeed make science useless and unreliable.

[DaivdBehar]

Hi, Queenie. Are you a Democrat?

[DaivdBehar]

Among Democrats, Queenie would be one of the prettiest.

[DaivdBehar]

Here, Queenie. Judge for yourself, Hon. A triple bagger, 2 for her head, and one for yourself in case hers tears.

https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/06/usa-today-fabricated-sources-01.jpeg

[Jerry B.]

Sorta like how the Russian’s Facebook ads made Clinton lose the 2016 election?

[DaivdBehar]

OK, medicine is messy. Physics may be cleaner. No.

https://orbitermag.com/theoretical-physics-bad-science/

[Longtobefree]

Most of the fainting was from tight corsets.

[Jimmy the Dane]

You don't win the argument simply because you parse words and redefine something to fit into your political view. That is just a really low brow, low effort, low intellectual move that is transparent to anyone who has an IQ above 70 and has not drank the kool aid.

[DaivdBehar]

Queenie, you are so impressive, Hon. Great point.

Women did not hydrate in the Victorian Era. The water was not treated, and only whiskey and beer were safe. Dehydrated or half drunk. Fainting is expected.

That female swimmer is a mediocre male swimmer but a dominant female swimmer. The denial of reality by Penn is a tort. It is the ultimate in harassment and discrimination against the female swimmers. They are also retaliating against any female that questions having a dude in the showers, staring at their charms. The female swimmers should be paid $billion by the woke scum at Penn. All should be fired. Dude gets wood showering with the females. He also loves fucking a lot of females. Scumbag wokes are groomers, promoters of rape, voyeurism, and an abomination.

[DaivdBehar]

Queenie. When you see a beautiful woman in one of those Democrat Hellscape, ask where she is from. Not from there. Locals women are not just ugly, but nasty when they open their mouths.

[DaivdBehar]

Queenie, Honey. My high school was pretty good. None matches it for Nobel Laureate alums. Now it is woke. Equity made it totally ordinary. I would have achieved far more in an Iowa rural high school, as any average student there always has. They not only have the top SAT scores in the country, trading that distinction with other Midwest farm states every year. They did the farm chores from 5 AM until they caught the bus at 7 AM. It is quite common for a 12 year old to show her very own 200 lb pig. She would know a lot more biology and science than anyone at my urban school.

My urban upbringing made me more provincial than any kid in a Kentucky Holler. Beltway people are the same way. Proud and arrogant despite being stupid and naive.

[Da5id]

I have him muted. If he is a troll why respond? If he is actually disabled in some way, as you repeatedly state, your constant mockery and trolling of him reflects badly on you, not him. But perhaps that is just the kind of person you are?

[DaivdBehar]

Kentucky is among the states with the highest SAT's. Those Holler kids outperform elite kids in shithole, Democrat Hellscapes.

[DaivdBehar]

Queenie. You are surprisingly so intelligent.

[Rossami]

You personally may not have believed it but did you speak out against it when many, many of your political allies (including the candidate who lost) made precisely that claim?

[DaivdBehar]

Hi, Queenie. You do not get to define me. I identify as rich. I expect you to send me money to comply with my identity. I have Cashapp.

[DaivdBehar]

Thank you, Queenie. Such a surprisingly intelligent comment.

[Sarcastr0]

I mean, never mind what actual scientists say, they're all liberal shills.
Those faith-based liberals are so anti-science they don't agree with Jimmy's Science!

[Krayt]

Did they actually used to faint? Or did Hollywood spend 75 years telling us they faint, the same way a swat on the back of the head safely knocks you out, while multiple kicks to ghe head don't if it's an exciting fight?

[bernard11]

I don't think they fainted so much.

[bevis the lumberjack]

As a non-partisan with an actual STEM degree whenever I see politicians and their zealots start braying about science it makes me baby barf. These people have zero understanding or interest in actual science or its processes, they just want to twist it to their ends.

A whole bunch of this conversation is muted to me, but I assume it was either the climate or the pandemic or perhaps trans stuff. All of those things have become so politicized that science left the building long long ago.

[Sarcastr0]

I have lots of grey on my own VC threads these days. I cannot help you there.

Politicians using science is nothing new. They started in on that about when they stopped invoking God. As someone with both STEM and science policy degrees, the main issue I take is less the abuse of science (academics do that all the time as well), but rather putting the cart before the horse.
Science should not be dictating policy - values should be. Science should be informing policy. Hiding the value judgement you're making behind science is unhelpful to say the least.

This is what Jimmy is doing. Except he's not really skillful enough to conceal how little he knows or cares about the science he's attempting to invoke.

[DavidTaylor]

One flaw in the ranking of average state SAT scores is that it generally fails to control for states in which only college-bound kids take the SAT versus states in which many other kids take the SAT as well. For example, Kentucky's participation rate is 4%, which suggests that a fairly select group is taking the SAT exams. The participation rate for Delaware is 96% -- so it is not surprising that Delaware ranks 43 in the U.S. on average SAT scores. Thus, Minnesota's participation rate is 2% -- a very select group of high school kids take the SAT -- and Minnesota ranks #1 on the SAT average. Mississippi -- which no one would point to as a high quality public school system, ranking 35th in the U.S. for K-12 education -- manages to rank #11 on the SATs because only 1% of its high school kids take the SAT exam...

[Don Nico]

"Science should not be dictating policy - values should be. Science should be informing policy. "
Here, I fully agree.

[bevis the lumberjack]

Yeah I pretty much have the same reaction when they pull out God too. More of an eye roll than nausea. Most of the God invokers don’t practice what they preach and generally don’t really have policy positions consistent with God as I understand Him (Her?).

And worst of all they want to invoke God to use the power of the government to force us to behave in way they believe God wants us to. Whether you agree with their interpretation or not, compelling behavior wasn’t what God had in mind. God was about choosing, not about forcing. We’re supposed to go out and bear witness, not go out and whip those bastards into shape.

[ah....Clem]

There's some evidence that the tight corsets commonly worn at that time restricted breathing and blood flow sufficiently to cause insufficient oxygen flow to the brain, which is the primary cause of fainting.

Which hardly disproves that fainting was a social construct, but there may be a physiological factor as well.

[ah....Clem]

Science also corrects itself when a practitioner fabricates data, e.g. see Andrew Wakefield.

Agree that this appears to be an example of this rather than "...where someone either made a good faith mistake, or has obtained more data..."

[Sarcastr0]

Hah.

I was talking historically - leaders were all divine right/majesty, until they were all follow the science.