Nieman Foundation at Harvard
HOME
          
LATEST STORY
Class is still a taboo topic in the U.S. The Guardian’s ambitious new rural reporting projects are tackling it
ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
March 26, 2012, 5:47 p.m.

This American Life’s retraction of the Mike Daisey story set an online listening record

Nearly 900,000 people streamed or downloaded Episode 460, “Retraction,” in the first week after it aired.

One common problem with journalistic errors is that it’s rare for a correction to get as much attention as the original mistake. The screwup goes viral; the mea culpa is a footnote.

But that wasn’t the case with the stunning, sometimes excruciating retraction of Mike Daisey’s partially fabricated This American Life story about working conditions in the Chinese factories that supply Apple products. The hour-long correction attracted more online listeners in its first week than any episode in the program’s history — including the original Daisey show back in January, which previously held the record.

This American Life logoSome 891,474 people have podcasted or streamed Episode 460, titled simply “Retraction,” according to production manager Seth Lind.

Daisey’s original story remains, for now at least, the most listened-to episode in the show’s online history, but it had about two months after its air date to keep gathering listeners. That episode was “the single most popular podcast in This American Life’s history, with 888,000 downloads (typically the number is 750,000) and 206,000 [subsequent] streams to date,” according to a March 16 statement. (This American Life also has about 1.8 million radio listeners a week.)

The audio of the January story has since been removed from the TAL website. (You can still hear it here.) This American Life’s hourlong retraction is no longer available for free download — downloads of all episodes are disabled after one week — but it is still available for streaming on the TAL website and in its mobile apps.

Daisey apologized again yesterday, saying he let down journalists, human-rights workers, and the theater community. “When I said onstage that I had personally experienced things I in fact did not, I failed to honor the contract I’d established with my audiences over many years and many shows,” Daisey wrote. “In doing so, I not only violated their trust, I also made worse art.”

POSTED     March 26, 2012, 5:47 p.m.
SHARE THIS STORY
   
Show comments  
Show tags
 
Join the 35,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
Class is still a taboo topic in the U.S. The Guardian’s ambitious new rural reporting projects are tackling it
“We want to support people who actually live in these places reporting on their own states, about inequality, and then we want to bring them to traditional elite audiences.”
Do you trust the news, or do you trust your news? In the U.S., there’s a huge gap between the two
Plus: A bill to outlaw fake news in the Philippines, and the question of whether real news outlets should cover fake news.
Vox’s healthcare newsletter (with ads sold out) is filling a role beyond “articles on the Internet”
“I’m keeping in mind that there are actually people reading these stories who are relying on us for information.”