Departments



Articles

Less

Letters to the Editor: Is this How Busch Supports our Military?
March 24th, 2003

Letters to the Editor: Letter to the Editor
January 11th, 2003

Letters to the Editor: Letter to the Editor
January 10th, 2003

Letters to the Editor: Letter to the Editor - Support Your Local Police
December 11th, 2002

Letters to the Editor: Letter to the Editor
November 4th, 2002

Letters to the Editor: Letters to the Editor
October 15th, 2002

Letters to the Editor: Jack Gargan Responds
August 6th, 2002

Letters to the Editor: Letter To The Editor:
July 19th, 2002

Letters to the Editor: Remembering Frank Small
July 18th, 2002

Letters to the Editor: Letter to the Editor
June 14th, 2002

Letters to the Editor: Letters to the Editor
June 5th, 2002

Letters to the Editor: What a Treat!
May 27th, 2002

Letters to the Editor: Letters to the Editor
May 25th, 2002

Letters to the Editor: Cemetary Point Beach Trash
May 22nd, 2002

Letters to the Editor: Letter to The Editor
May 13th, 2002

More

Accuracy in Reporting Needed

Accuracy in Reporting Needed

Letters to the Editor

Dear Editor,

It is very important to preserve the integrity of your newspaper that corrections be reported when you print fact errors. I am disappointed that you did not at least publish my letter to the editor last week regarding the fact errors in the "Informed Voters Wanted" editorial.

I don`t think that just printing the Charrette report in its entirety solves the problem. Both the incorrect article and date of publishing need to be referenced, along with the corrected information. Perhaps the Cedar Key News needs an ongoing corrections column, as the articles remain available online for such a long period of time, and will continue to mislead the public. It is imperative that the information
you print as news is truth. Maybe providing a byline for every article would help make the reporting reliable, as someone would become accountable for their accuracy.


In this week`s edition, the City Commission Meeting Summary reports that the Commission unanimously approved a proposal to submit application for a Community Development Block Grant. This information is also incorrect. The Commission`s vote was actually four in favor and one against. This error may be unimportant to the paper, however, it is important to me. Several citizens asked that I not support another grant proposal right now, and I tried to represent their wishes. Your inaccurate report makes it seem as if I ignored their requests. Please correct this challenge the paper is encountering, or lose the trust of the community.

Thanks,
Vanessa Edmunds

Editors Note: We at Cedar Key News regret our error in reporting that Commissioner Edmunds voted for, rather than against the motion in question. At Commissioner Edmunds` suggestion, we are instituting a "Corrections Button" that should facilitate finding whatever corrections that are needed in the future.

Click for printer friendly version

Email this article to a friend

 

 

© 2013
Cedar Key News

cedarkeynews@gmail.com