Update, 9/8: As reader James flags in comments, the text of the USA Weekend story has now been corrected. The latest version notes that when a raise bumps you into a higher tax bracket, “earnings below that threshold are still taxed at the previous, lower tax rate.” A note at the top of the article states that the earlier version “misstated the impact of tax brackets on raises.”
Campaign Desk
03:45 PM - September 6, 2011
A More Than Marginally Embarrassing Mistake
USA Weekend caught flatfooted on tax goof
‘See you on the other side’ - Meet Jessica Lum, a terminally ill 25-year-old who chose to spend what little time she had practicing journalism
#Realtalk: This is the best moment to be in journalism - The old stuff isn’t coming back, but that’s okay
Streams of consciousness - Millennials expect a steady diet of quick-hit, social-media-mediated bits and bytes. What does that mean for journalism?
Sticking with the truth - How ‘balanced’ coverage helped sustain the bogus claim that childhood vaccines can cause autism
An ink-stained stretch - Can Aaron Kushner save the Orange County Register—and the newspaper industry?
Fearless British mother who talked down Woolwich terrorists
“It is only you versus many people, you are going to lose”
7 questions for President Obama
Stop with the Jew-ranking already!
“There are some lists that have helped Jews in the past, including, most notably, Schindler’s, but…”
Please continue pronouncing ‘gif’ any way you please
We are all correct
CJR's Guide to Online News Startups
Uptown Messenger – Hyperlocal news for a neighborhood in New Orleans
Who Owns What
The Business of Digital Journalism
A report from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
Questions and exercises for journalism students.
You're always welcome on my turf, Greg! Interesting post.
#1 Posted by Craig Silverman, CJR on Wed 7 Sep 2011 at 01:36 PM
The reporter finally corrected it:
A hefty raise might not be as big as it looks. Extra money could bump you into the next tax bracket, which means you’ll pay a higher tax rate on earnings above a certain threshold. Relax: Your earnings below that threshold are still taxed at the previous, lower tax rate.
with this notation up top: "An earlier version of the story below misstated the impact of tax brackets on raises."
I'm pretty sure it is the embarrassment of the ridicule by his professional peers, rather than the facts presented by the lowly commenters or those picayunish liberals that did it. Whatever. Good on him for the correction.
But @Greg, I think you are a little off-base here:
"...I’m more inclined than Bernstein or Baker (or Jon Chait and Matthew Yglesias, who are also piling on) to cut the publication some slack for the original mistake. This wasn’t a serious news article. And USA Weekend doesn’t even present itself as a serious publication."
I really object to that. People believe this kind of stuff. This is the kind of article that people read far more often than CJR or Bernstein or Baker. This is where people *get* this kind of misinformation. This is the kind of article that sticks in people's mind and they remember it more than anything Chait or MY will ever write about marginal tax brackets.
They are trading off the USA Today name, and misinformation like this reflects poorly on both of them. So I don't think they ought to get one iota of slack. You are far too indulgent of lazy, mindless journalism.
#2 Posted by James, CJR on Wed 7 Sep 2011 at 06:18 PM