The Boston Herald this morning engages in a bit of what Stephen Colbert might call “truthiness.” The upper right is dominated by a large photo of a smiling Archbishop Seán O’Malley giving the thumbs-up sign. The headline: “Cardinal Sean!”
O’Malley has always struck me as a pretty humble, low-key guy. So I was surprised that he would indulge in such a self-congratulatory gesture — especially since I’d already heard a radio report in which he said he saw his elevation as a reflection of the importance of Boston, not himself.
And sure enough — there in tiny type, below the photo, appear three little words: “STAFF FILE PHOTO.” So he didn’t. But the Herald made it look like he did. Except it’s got a disclaimer. Except a lot of people aren’t going to notice it.
Needless to say, the three little words aren’t even remotely visible if you view the front on BostonHerald.com — even if you click on it and blow it up, the disclaimer is too blurry to be readable.
In the great scheme of things, I suppose this is relatively harmless. But truthy though it may be, it’s not quite truthful, and the Herald’s editors shouldn’t have done it.
Discover more from Media Nation
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
Anonymous
Come on, Dan. How long have you been reading newspapers, anyway? It didn’t even cross my mind that the photo of O’Malley might have been taking yesterday. It just screams file photo. What did you think: That O’Malley invited the media over to sleep over at his place, and this photo was snapped just after he got the news at 6 a.m.?
Anonymous
It’s not about what Dan or any other media-savvy reader would think. It’s about the impression on the general readership, which is, O’Malley grins and gives a big thumbs up upon being elevated to cardinal. It’s lame.
Dan Kennedy
Anon. 11:50 –In fact, O’Malley was in Minnesota yesterday. It would have been perfectly logical for him to come out and spend a few moments talking about his being named a cardinal. No one would have had to be sleeping in his room at 6 a.m.I’m reminded of a talk that Michael Isikoff gave at Harvard last fall. He was making fun of a rule adopted by his news org (Newsweek) and others requiring that it always be explained why an anonymous source would not go on the record — he called it “silly,” and said it was “patently obvious” why sources would not go on the record. Well, Washington insiders would get it, but what about everyone else?
John Galt
Misleading the populace is now a media obsession. Anything except good ol’ hard work and integrity goes. Phoniness, to great dismay, is American as apple pie. And, everyone around the globe knows it!
Anonymous
At the risk of engaging in the “everybody does it” defense, I don’t see anyone troubled by the half of the Globe flubs that don’t make the corrections column. Dumbing down of America and ethical slippery slopes are of about equal visibility, IMHO…
Anonymous
Anon. 12:04 here – I continually rail about the Globe, too. The Herald is even worse, though.
neil
Channel 7’s Victoria Block (as best as I could tell from the footage) interviewed him in St. Paul. Christa Delcamp said “Seven News caught up with” him, and cut to Byron Barnett, pointlessly “live” standing in front of O’Malley’s residence in the South End, who repeated that Seven News “tracked him down”, and “caught up with him” for the interview. As if he were prey cleverly running and hiding from TV channels and only Ch 7’s trackers were wily enough to catch him. Barnett’s live blather wrapped Block’s interview. But you never hear tracker-and-catcher Block who was the one who actually did the interview, only O’Malley replying to her. Then back to Barnett who just repeats that O’Malley also said this and that. Barnett is Barnett, but Block is merely “Seven News”. Block did the work, Barnett gets the credit. What’s up with that?WCVB had even less going on (not that this is much of a story to begin with of course), with Jim Morelli’s pointlessly-standing-outside in Brighton “live” report, and a phone (!) interview with reliable professional Catholic/hack Ray Flynn. I wonder where he was, the Antarctic? Always available for a few words for the boyos, eh Ray.
Specks
Christa Delcamp said “Seven News caught up with” him, and cut to Byron Barnett, pointlessly “live” standing in front of O’Malley’s residence in the South End, who repeated that Seven News “tracked him down”, and “caught up with him” for the interview. As if he were prey cleverly running and hiding from TV channels and only Ch 7’s trackers were wily enough to catch him.Cheney must’ve been lurking around Minn.
Anonymous
This is some pretty lame criticism. How many times has the Phoenix run file art of a rock band on its cover to go with a story about the group, Dan? The Globe also ran file art — but its photo was boring so then it’s ok? Not one reader called or emailed to complain about the “file photo.” The tut-tutting of Kennedy and the Poynter pointy-heads is beyond silly.
Anonymous
Wrong. The Herald photo is misleading about context, while the appropriately boring (i.e., obviously from the files) Globe photo is not.
Anonymous
The [i]Globe[/i] photo is also a bit misleading because it shows O’Malley wearing red vestments, implying that he is already dressing in Cardinal red, which he has no right to do until he is actually made Cardinal on March 24th. The Catholic Church uses red vestments for Masses celebrating Martyrs, Apostles (all but one of whom were Martyrs too) and the Holy Spirit. But the [i]Herald[/i] photo is outright character assassination. Thank you, Dan, for standing up for the truth here.
Anonymous
Character assassination. Yeah, that’s it. No we see the light.