Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.

Donate
Topics

Star Tribune amends Vikings stadium editorial

Following my Tuesday post about the Star Tribune editorialists misrepresenting the Convention Center sales tax at the heart of a Vikings stadium subsidy plan, the paper issued a “clarification” Friday:
“A Dec.

Following my Tuesday post about the Star Tribune editorialists misrepresenting the Convention Center sales tax at the heart of a Vikings stadium subsidy plan, the paper issued a “clarification” Friday:

“A Dec. 13 editorial on the Vikings stadium effort said that Legislature would have to extend the tax authorization that finances the Minneapolis Convention Center after the bonds are paid off in 2020. In fact, the Legislature would be free to change or kill the tax, but it would continue if lawmakers did nothing.”

I appreciate the Strib’s public statement; they could’ve safely ignored the complaint. But while this may seem uncharitable, I’d also note this is another example of a low-level plague that has long afflicted journalism: calling things clarifications when they are really corrections.

A clarification is when you were right on the facts but not precise enough. A correction is when your facts were wrong — in this case, saying an extension was required when it was not.

Article continues after advertisement

You can probably find a Braublog violation out there, so I say this only to stiffen the backbones of us all. By the way, there is still time for the Strib to clarify their stadium-land disclaimer.