I Have Been Misquoted Again and This Time I Have Witnesses
Let me be perfectly clear. I did not say that Pomelo's coverage of the Rind Transparency Initiative was merely adequate. I said it was the least bad thing I had read all quarter. These are not the same statement. They are not even in the same family of statements. That someone at factjuice.com chose to report otherwise is not a misunderstanding. It is a editorial decision. A wrong one. I am keeping notes.
The piece in question — published without correction, without retraction, without so much as a footnote of shame — was attributed to one Tangelo, who has, in my experience, a famously loose relationship with quotation marks. I do not say this to be unkind. I say it because it is true and because someone has to. The Ledger now has fourteen entries. Tangelo accounts for three of them. I did not plan for this. The Ledger planned for itself.
What I actually said was captured in full by Quince, who was standing directly beside me, eating something sticky and paying attention. Quince will confirm. Quince has confirmed. The so-called workers at the rival rag have been made aware of Quince's confirmation and have responded with the institutional silence of an organisation that knows precisely what it has done.
I am not asking for an apology. I have given up expecting apologies from the citrus cabal. I am asking, modestly, for accuracy — that foundational journalistic virtue which factjuice.com lists on its About page and practices, by my count, on alternate Tuesdays when Peach is in a good mood. I have been misquoted in print, in summary, and now, reportedly, in casual conversation at a networking event I did not attend. I was not there. I said nothing. Whatever they claim I said, I did not say it.
The Ledger remains open.