4getit, Tulsa, Ok. (2/12/2009 3:42:08 AM)

Whoa, Im SHOCKED! Who would have guessed the Bates would have made up his own facts? So, he really is just a right wing hack with an agenda. Man, I never would have guessed that. Hopefully, he will slither away like his hero DelGiorno did and never return.

Nice reporting there, Skippy.

tulsan09, Tulsa (2/12/2009 6:53:26 AM)

So if a reporter makes up facts that he knows are not true, why isn't he fired by the UT? Michael Bates is exactly the reason I pass by the UT every time I see it on a newstand, just like I do the National Enquirer.

Webmeister, (2/12/2009 7:54:07 AM)

If the Tulsa World wants to put a muzzle on Michael Bates, it must mean the Kaiser River Tax II ploy or equivalent is headed our way.

Had Michael Bates even contacted the Tulsa World in advance of publication to verify the factuality of his article in UTW, would the Tulsa World in all likelihood have just totally ignored his request for verification?

The ownership and editorial board of the Tulsa World despise Michael Bates for the very simple reason he brings an INDEPENDENT analytical mind to local public policy discussions, and he has several recurrent forums independent of the control of the Tulsa World, discussions that the Tulsa World deem their inherited monopoly.

I look forward to many, many more analytical public policy discussions from Mr. Michael Bates, on his website batesline. com, in Urban Tulsa Weekly, and elsewhere.

BottleCap, BA (2/12/2009 8:10:22 AM)

I know of Michael Bates research and it is usually top knotch. I'd be willing to bet that he did uncover some inconsistencies that lead to his conclusion, which he thought was correct.

I bet he fell into the same trap that many scientists fall into. The want to prove a certain theory so bad that they don't explore every explanation in fear that it may disprove them.

I'm glad Michael settled the suit because I fear that even if he would have won, fighting it in court would have left him broke.

DH, Tulsa (2/12/2009 8:21:57 AM)

Righton;

I agree with you except for the fact that Neal and Jones are OpEd writers, not journalists, which allows them to consistently lie and mislead readers on a weekly basis.

Bates made a clerical error I am sure. It wasn't 20% it was 19%. Give me a break. If TW was so confident in their product they wouldn't even worry about this.

DH, Tulsa (2/12/2009 8:22:33 AM)

* not reporters

ProudTulsan73, (2/12/2009 8:31:10 AM)

It wasn't 20 percent DH ... It was 5. Basically Bates made up his own information. And Bates is NOT a journalist.

Eric, Tulsa (2/12/2009 8:36:01 AM)

Good.
Everybody kiss and make up.
...
;-*

Lawrence, Tulsa (2/12/2009 8:45:43 AM)

Goliath wins again

Lawrence, Tulsa (2/12/2009 8:47:24 AM)

If the Tulsa World wants to put a muzzle on Michael Bates, it must mean the Kaiser River Tax II ploy or equivalent is headed our way.

Had Michael Bates even contacted the Tulsa World in advance of publication to verify the factuality of his article in UTW, would the Tulsa World in all likelihood have just totally ignored his request for verification?
__________________

I think that's 100% true

The Real Joe Dolty, TULSA (2/12/2009 8:53:22 AM)

I believe the Tulsa World knew they would lose the lawsuit if they didn't give Mr. Bates the same opportunity they gave the UTW to view their records and offer a retraction.

Obviously the error on both Mr. Bates and UTW was not to try to confirm the circulation facts with the TW.

The error on the Tulsa World's part was they filed a lawsuit and made a big to-do about it all without trying to contact them ahead of time and requesting a retraction. But then again that wouldn't have given them three days of big headlines and it wouldn't have allowed them to play the martyr.

lil sparrow, Midwest Flyway (2/12/2009 8:59:04 AM)

shame on you Michael Bates (Lawrence and B.M)

The Real Joe Dolty, TULSA (2/12/2009 9:03:13 AM)

And I don't believe this was intentional on the UTW or Mr. Bates part.

The Real Joe Dolty, TULSA (2/12/2009 9:04:39 AM)

"I know of Michael Bates research and it is usually top knotch. I'd be willing to bet that he did uncover some inconsistencies that lead to his conclusion, which he thought was correct.

I bet he fell into the same trap that many scientists fall into. The want to prove a certain theory so bad that they don't explore every explanation in fear that it may disprove them.

I'm glad Michael settled the suit because I fear that even if he would have won, fighting it in court would have left him broke."

What he said

4getit, Tulsa, Ok. (2/12/2009 9:11:15 AM)

Joe, webmeister, lawerence, and righton, You all cannot be serious can you? If the roles were reversed then you all would be running around with your hair on fire screaming about the mainstream media and their liberal bias. OMG the hypocrisy here is TOO rich. Bates has now been proven to be nothing more than a political hack and a joke. He has no credibility and you all make excuses for him. UNBELIEVABLE.

Stick61, Tulsa (2/12/2009 9:18:31 AM)

Michael Bates has been unmasked as a trafficker in unsubstantiated aspersions. The TW did the community a service by suing him and forcing him to admit his negligence. If you want the prestige that goes with being a serious investigative journalist, you have to honor the fundamentals of the craft. Bates didn't do that.

Lawrence, Tulsa (2/12/2009 9:19:28 AM)

The error on the Tulsa World's part was they filed a lawsuit and made a big to-do about it all without trying to contact them ahead of time and requesting a retraction. But then again that wouldn't have given them three days of big headlines and it wouldn't have allowed them to play the martyr.
___________________

That's exactly why I canceled my subscription to the Tulsa World and nothing has changed my mind. They've called me asking me to start back with them again but I told them I will not. If they had contacted the UTW and Bates ahead of time and they refused to retract, then I'd be on the Tulsa World's side. But, no, they had to play it up.

Webmeister, (2/12/2009 9:22:25 AM)

Here's a possible future article that Michael Bates might cogitate on:

Track the serial, positive puff-piece "news" articles and re-current echo-chamber Editorials promoting public tax dollars being "invested" in Great Plains Airlines that emanated from the pages of the Tulsa World.

Track these from the bone-headed inception of Great Plains Airlines to its demise a short three years later.

Oh, and remember to mention the secret, undisclosed majority equity ownership of World Publishing Co. in GPA during the same time period, practically right up until the moment the airline figuratively crashed and burned.

A majority equity ownership position funded by the donation of IN-KIND advertising to Great Plains Airlines in exchange for Preferred Stock.

Now, THAT would be worthy of a future article.

Stick61, Tulsa (2/12/2009 9:26:07 AM)

No one except disaffected mumblers is going to read any future articles by Michael Bates. He is toast.

4getit, Tulsa, Ok. (2/12/2009 9:28:36 AM)

Ok Lawrence lets get this straight.
Bates makes up a bunch of B.S. about the World using shabby unconfirmed research. The World sues him, and now you believe that it is the World's fault for suing. Ok I guess we are now officially in the blaming the victim mode.

I love it.

SRV, (2/12/2009 9:29:12 AM)

I think that this is the THIRD time TW has had to sue that lame weekly. I worked at TW in the mid-to-late 90s and TW had just finished getting an apology from Keith/UTW for another false claim/story. The apology letter hung on the wall in the Entertainment Section, where we would laugh from time to time. Keith needs to stick to indy/alternative reporting and leave the daily to its on. He will never understand this as he is an old Tulsa Tribune reporter. UTW is a pretty week paper that if it were not free, probably would not even exist, much less HAVE a subscription base!

Arbythree, Tulsa (2/12/2009 9:53:42 AM)

Gotcha Bates!!!!

Congratulations TW!!!!

Dr. Strangelove, Tulsa (2/12/2009 9:56:38 AM)

I think Bates is a flake. I like UTW, but I just skip his column completely. They need to get rid of him. Anyone that wants to read his blather can just go on his blog.

jpbanjo, (2/12/2009 10:02:55 AM)

Like a lot of internet bloggers, Bates, apparently let his political convictions over come some simple journalism practices that he should know apply in the print world. First, if you have a hot story with damaging information, in this case that the World was cooking the books on it’s circulation numbers to up it’s advertising rates, you always find a second independent source to confirm your facts or suspicions. That’s called Journalism 101. Next you call the company or person you are about to expose for the frauds you believe them to be and ask if they care to comment on what you are about to publish about them. That’s Journalism 201.
Bates’ apparently had neither source nor backup confirmation for his accusations and his later statement that the World should have called him after he printed the libel to give him a chance to change his imagined facts shows how little he or his editor understand these simple rules of the game..

The Real Joe Dolty, TULSA (2/12/2009 10:04:49 AM)

"If they had contacted the UTW and Bates ahead of time and they refused to retract, then I'd be on the Tulsa World's side. But, no, they had to play it up."

yes, exactly