One thing that amazes me at times is just how much bad information is out there. Well, I’ve found a perfect example of exactly how that happens.

The conservative website “The Post & Email” published an article titled “Time to Bust Public Sector Unions!” Under the heading “It’s NOT About Fair Pay!” author JB Williams asserts that teachers are much better paid than the average American, with an average salary of $85,000 per year.

Yeah, doesn’t sound right to me, either, but here’s a screenshot showing Williams’ claim:

[Click on the screencap to see a larger version that includes the URL in the address bar]

A quick review of the document Williams links to, however, clears the mystery right up.  Instead of posting the average salary of teachers in the given states, Williams posted the number of teachers working in those states. As shown in the screencap from the linked site below, the average teacher’s salary isn’t anywhere near what Williams is claiming.

[Click on the screencap to see a larger version that includes the URL in the address bar]

Before you decide if you think is just an innocent mistake, pay close attention to what was actually copied. There are two separate lists on the screencap from AllEducationSchools.com. The first is the number of teachers in states with the most teachers, and the second is the highest average teacher salaries by state. In the P&E post, the first 5 states listed have the name followed by a dash and then a number that has no dollar value next to it. The remaining states have the name, dash and a number WITH a dollar value, indicating that these lists aren’t counting the same thing (otherwise, why only put a dollar sign on half of the entries?)

Even more telling, though, is that only one state is listed on both of the lists on the AES page - New York. Yet on the P&E post, New York is only listed *once* and Williams chose to use the “number of teachers” figure rather than the “average salary” figure. Obviously, Williams was aware that there were different numbers for at least one state, but this apparently didn’t prompt a closer look at what the numbers were actually representing.

It should be noted that the editor of the “P&E” moderates all comments posted on the board. In fact, they have a very interesting comment policy:

Comment Policy

The Post & Email allows comments on its news articles. But because this news site is principally concerned with getting out the news rather than being a forum for conversation or debate, almost none of the comments posted for motives found on other blogs will be published.

Exceptions to this rule are as follows:

Comments regarding errors in our articles will be considered:  if The Post & Email considers it necessary, corrections will be made; but the comment will not be published, unless it merits serious consideration.

Comments disagreeing with editorials or articles will generally not be published unless the commenter is objecting to the fairness and objectivity of the article and has sound reasons to do so.

Comments requesting The Post & Email to divulge its confidential sources will be deleted, as this is contrary to the ethics of journalism.

Comments seeking publicity for other news items or organizations will not be published.

Off-topic comments are almost never published.  Rude comments are never published.  If your rude comment was not published but had some reasonable intent to correct the error of another, try posting it again, but this time with civility.  Because we expect children to be reading our newspaper under the supervision of their parents, we ask that comments be kept clean and free of obscenities and adult innuendo or content.  We feel that there is enough sordidness in the world such that children are always at risk, and we do not wish to contribute to their exposure to it here.

This disclosure is made for the sake of every reader so you know that your comment is treated equitably according to our editorial policy stated here.

For those submitting Letters to the Editor, Blogs-of-the-Day, Editorials and other materials, The Post & Email reserves the right to accept or reject any submission and to make any revisions to the submission before publication.  Each submission will be proofread for content, grammar, spelling, punctuation and appropriateness for our newspaper.  Please make sure to cite all sources in your submissions and always describe events in your own words.  It is neither acceptable nor legal to copy another’s work and submit it as one’s own. As a corporation, The Post & Email can be held liable for any plagiarism published on its pages, whether intended or unintended.

The Post & Email will have the final word on changes before publication.  Anyone in disagreement with this policy should not submit items for consideration.

With very rare exceptions, we do not accept articles which have been published on other blogs or news sites.  We seek original material from citizen writers.  We do not publish internet chain mails or copyrighted material from other websites.

Please note: If you are submitting an article of any kind, please do not quote from, cite, or link back to anything published on the jbjd website, as we wish to avoid any legal entanglements with this author despite her excellent research.

Additional Editor’s Note: Because there is a mountain of evidence indicating that Barack H. Obama is not a natural born Citizen as required by Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution to serve as President, The Post & Email does not refer to him as the “President.”  Therefore, if your submission refers to “President Obama” or “Mr. President,” the wording will be changed unless and until Obama proves that he meets the eligibility criteria.  Anyone not in agreement with this policy should withhold his or her submission.

So, it’s pretty clear that anything that actually gets posted in the comment section has been seen and approved by the “”P&E.” As of this writing, however, at least two comments regarding the inaccuracy of this post have been allowed through moderation, yet no changes have been made to the article itself, which, I suppose, could be viewed as a violation of their own policy, if you want to look at it that way.  The policy says “Comments regarding errors in our articles will be considered:  if The Post & Email considers it necessary, corrections will be made; but the comment will not be published, unless it merits serious consideration.” I’m not exactly clear on what would make a comment regarding a correction merit serious consideration as opposed to one that would remain unpublished but result in a correction to the post, but in this case, the comment was published (which is, admittedly, better than nothing) but no correction has been made or noted.

Were that to happen here (as did the other day, in fact) I would leave the erroneous paragraph in place, highlight it with a strikethrough and add a note with the correct information.  As it stands now, however, if someone visits the “P&E” and opts not to read the comments, or runs across the post quoted on another site or as part of an aggregation site - neither of which would include the comments - the reader would have no way to know the information presented is demonstrably false.

And that’s exactly how bad information spreads. People will read that post, think teachers are just wallowing in their riches and tell others of the outrage. The only way to combat it is to ensure the correct information gets out.