My Letter to USA Today

Following up on my post last Friday about the press herd misquoting Vice President Dick Cheney as saying that if we elect Kerry we'll get attacked again: I was aggravated that USA Today repeated the misquote again today. Therefore I submitted the following Letter to the Editor:

USA Today, along with other media outlets, continues to mischaracterize quotes made last week by Vice President Dick Cheney regarding the importance of the pending election on the War on Terror. The mischaracterization occurs by truncating Cheney's comments to in a manner that mistates his meaning.

In the article in today's edition on page 11A, "Powell, Rice defend Cheney's comment" you quote the Vice President as saying "that if John Kerry is elected president, 'the danger is that we'll get hit again' by terrorists."

The implication of that abbreviated quote is that Cheney is implying that if we elect Bush/Cheney we won't be attacked. This is nonsense and is not the meaning of Cheney's actual quote.

The full quote from the Vice President is:

"Because if we make the wrong choice,then the danger is that we'll get hit again, that we'll be hit in a way that will be devasting from the standpoint of the United States, and that we'll fall back into the pre-9/11 mindset if you will, that in fact these terroist attacks are just criminal acts, and that we're not really at war. I think that would be a terrible mistake for us."

An honest reading of the full remark by Cheney reveals that he is not saying that if we elect Kerry we risk being attacked again, as your misquote implies. The Vice President is instead arguing that if we make the wrong choice and elect a new adminstration that would respond to a terrorist attack in a 9/10 mode as a crime and not a war that it would be a mistake. I personally believe that is an legitimate, accurate, and defensible point that needs to be made in this election season.

I urge USA to review the full quote on videotape. If you can find it. ABC's "Nightline" aired the clip last week with the same truncation. I only saw the full clip on Fox News Network.

My question is: why does USA Today continue to truncate the quote at a comma midsentence and, in doing so, alter the meaning entirely? Do you consider that valid journalistic practice?

I urge USA Today and other media outlets to accurately report the full quote and to cease mischaracterizing the Vice President's remarks on this important topic.