The Sidebar

source

If I come across factual information in mainstream press reports that I know is false, I do what I can to fix it.

In fact, according to Washington Post media critic Erik Wemple, I may hold the record for published corrections for a single news topic.

That's one reason it bugs me when journalists refuse to publish corrections for straightforward factual errors.

And that's one reason why the other day I filed a misconduct complaint against Margaret Holt, Standards Editor at the Chicago Tribune and a prominent figure in the newspaper business.

The tale starts with a July 16, 2018 Tribune story, Family members of Dr. Henry Heimlich say Red Cross guidance on choking victims could end in death by reporter Ese Olumhense. 

The article's about a campaign against the American Red Cross (ARC) launched last month by my sister Janet Heimlich, a journalist/author/nonprofit executive in Austin, Texas, and my brother Phil Heimlich, a former elected official in Cincinnati.

They're on the warpath because the ARC recommends performing back blows along with our dad's namesake maneuver (abdominal thrusts) to respond to a choking emergency.

In my opinion, Ms. Olumhense's story has some serious reportorial problems. (Re: the medical issues, visit my web page for links to related published documents.)

For example, the ARC's current protocol has been in place since 2005, a fact that's not mentioned in her article, so it's unclear if Ms. Olumhense was even aware of that.

If she was, presumably she would have asked Janet and Phil why they waited 13 years to voice their concerns. (In e-mails last month I asked Janet and Phil about that and about other aspects of their campaign; I haven't received a reply from either.)

Moving right along, here's the problem at hand:

(Leading) U.S. medical and first-aid groups, including the American Heart Association, the American College of Emergency Physicians and the National Safety Council all advise people to use Heimlich-style abdominal thrusts only...

What's the problem? 

It's this word: only.

I wasn't sure about the National Safety Council (NSC), and the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP), but I knew that in addition to our dad's famous treatment, current American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines recommend back blows and chest thrusts for responding to choking emergencies. 

So the day her article appeared, I e-mailed a friendly note to Ms. Olumhense, explained that I had questions, and politely asked her to provide her editor's name and e-mail address so I could copy her/him on my correspondence.

A short time later I received this:

From: Margaret C. Holt <mcholt@chicagotribune.com>
To: Peter Heimlich <peter.heimlich@gmail.com>
Subject: Tribune follow-up
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 16:37:49 +0000

Mr. Heimlich:
Your email was referred to me for response. The story is straightforward in quoting people about the topic, including a reference to a disagreement between some family members and the Red Cross. There is nothing further beyond what is in the published article.
Sincerely,
Margaret Holt
Standards Editor

Since I knew the part of the sentence about the AHA was wrong, I realized Ms. Holt didn't know what she was talking about.

And since she didn't ask what my concerns might be, presumably she didn't care, so I same-day replied:

Margaret,

Would you please provide me with your superior's name and e-mail address?

Thank you for your continued attention and I look forward to your reply.

Cheers, Peter

A week later I hadn't received a reply, so on July 23 I sent a friendly "can you help me?" e- mail to Tribune Managing Editor Peter Kendall who some years ago had capably assisted me with an unrelated editorial problem.

He passed the baton back to Ms. Holt:

Mr. Heimlich,
Thank you for your email.
I am copying Margaret on this so you can share any specific questions or concerns about the story.
She is the appropriate person to handle this.

After thanking him, I e-mailed media representatives at the AHA, NSC, and ACEP and asked for their organizations' positions.

An AHA Vice President e-mailed me this, taken from the organization's current guidelines (my emphasis):

“…chest thrusts, back slaps, and abdominal thrusts are feasible and effective for relieving severe FBAO [Foreign Body Airway Obstruction] in conscious (responsive) adults and children over 1 year of age.

The NSC rep replied that their organization adheres to AHA guidelines.

And an ACEP manager in that organization's communications department e-mailed me that their organization "does not have a formal policy on the Heimlich maneuver."

Based on those e-mails, the Tribune's claim that the three organizations "all advise people to use Heimlich-style abdominal thrusts only" is unequivocally wrong, ain't it?

Along the way I also identified what may be the source of Ms. Olumhense's error. 

Her article was apparently triggered by a July 10 e-mail and press release snet by a publicist representing Janet and Phil which included this sentence:

The American Heart Association teaches the Heimlich Maneuver as the only method to be used to save a choking victim, as does the National Safety Council and the American College of Emergency Physicians.

In any event, after obtaining the information from the AHA, NSC, and ACEP, I was on firm ground, so on August 7 I e-mailed the facts to Ms. Holt and requested a published clarification.

A week later I hadn't received a reply from Ms. Holt, so -- you guessed it -- on August 15, I asked Peter Kendall to step in.
 
A short time later I received this...

Mr. Heimlich:
We have reviewed your correspondence and disagree with your conclusion about factual
errors. There is no correction planned.
Sincerely,
Margaret Holt

...to which I replied:

The information I provided to you from the AHA, the NSC, and ACEP clearly contradicts the sentence in Ms. Olumhense's article, therefore please clearly state the basis for your disagreement.
If you intend to provide me with an adequate, professional response, please do so before this weekend so I may know how to proceed. 

Over a week later, no reply (click here for the entire e-mail trail of tears) and I could think of only one other available avenue of  possible recourse.

So a couple days ago, I phoned the Tribune's switchboard and explained that I wanted to file a misconduct complaint against a newsroom employee. 

I was transferred to a representative of a company that handles complaints for the Tribune, NAVEX Global Inc., based in Lake Oswego, Oregon, a Portland suburb.

The NAVEX rep was a helpful, articulate fellow who informed me that they didn't accept written complaints. That struck me as odd and I wanted a record of the transaction, so I recorded the call.

I explained the situation and he patiently and courteously took notes. 

Next he put me on a brief hold to arrange his notes into a formal complaint, then came back on the line and read it to me for my approval. 

I suggested a few tweaks which he incorporated in this final version:



I'll report any developments in a future item but even if my complaint falls on deaf ears, the excursion was worth my time because Ms. Holt's incompetent, unprofessional handling of such a small problem may signal deeper rot.

That is, if Ms. Holt buries easy-to-fix factual errors like this, how does she handle serious editorial problems?

With that in mind, if you've had any related experiences with her, drop me a line. 


This item has been slightly revised.