Navy’s Daily “ChInfo Clips” provides a synopsis of major articles of Navy interest.

Navy Times has a cover story on CO firings. Here is how the article led on in ChInfo Clips:

27. 7 Skippers’ Downfall
As alcohol ends still more COs’ careers, the Navy digs for answers
(NAVY TIMES 14 NOV 11) … William H. McMichael

The numbers don’t always tell the story. Navy statistics show the number of alcohol-related incidents in the fleet fell steadily over the past six fiscal years. But since the Navy also shrank during that time, the per-capita rate of alcohol-related incidents has remained relatively steady.
So the Navy’s alcohol problem is not going away. In fact, it might be getting worse. And nowhere is the problem more apparent than in the conduct of the Navy’s Amphib commanding officers.

Read that last line again…”Navy’s Amphib Commanding Officers”.

“Huh?” I say. Really? Something’s not right here.

So I emailed Bill McMichael, the author of the article.

Here’s his response.

That would be a gigantic mistake, but we didn’t do it. Chinfo Clips re-types rather than scans the clips, so someone mistakenly typed this. It did not appear in print this way. Here are the digits from our online version of the paper, which is identical to the paper.

Thanks for pointing this out. Hurts, tho. That makes me and us look stupid and it’s probably already taken on a life of its own. I’m asking Clips to do a correction but it won’t be out until tomorrow AM if they do.

Your Navy

As alcohol ends still
7more COs’ careers, the Navy digs for answers

skippers’ downfall

By William H. McMichael

bmcmichael@militarytimes.com
The numbers don’t always tell the story. Navy statistics show the number of alcohol­-related incidents in the fleet fell steadily over the past six fiscal years. But since the Navy also shrank during that time, the per-capita rate of alcohol-related incidents has remained relatively steady.

So the Navy’s alcohol problem is not going away. In fact, it might be getting worse. And nowhere is the problem more apparent than in the conduct of the Navy’s commanding officers.

So, Navy put out an article that incorrectly casts aspersions because someone manually retypes things.  And it will take 24 hours to get a correction?

Wow.

But sadly not surprising.

« On Midrats This Sunday (6 Nov 11): Eric Werthheim

Cyberwar: Hints & Allegations »

Posted by M. Ittleschmerz in Navy, Uncategorized

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

• http://www.navy.mil/blog CHINFO

  There was an error in today’s CHINFO clips in story #27, “7 Skippers’Downfall” … completely unintentional. Error is a product of electronic scanning. We apologize for any confusion this may have caused. Thanks for helping us set the record straight.

• Byron

  Well, three 0-4s will have to make the powerpoint and slides, an 0-5 will have to research the attributions, an 0-6 will have to type up a presentation for an 0-7….

• http://blog.usni.org M. Ittleschmerz

  Not sure how “electronic scanning” can enter a correctly spelled, contextually correct, idiomatic word.

  But, if that’s the rationale that works for you…

• Fouled Anchor

  CHINFO’s corrected version just went out to their email distro with nearly the identical text as posted in their comment above.

  “CORRECTION:
  There was an error in story #27, “7 Skippers’ Downfall,” in today’s CHINFO clips. The error resulted from electronically scanning the story. We apologize for any confusion this may have caused. The following is the correct version of the story which appears in the Nov. 14, 2011 issue of Navy Times.

  CHINFO staff”

• SwitchBlade

  That’s actually what Public Affairs Officers and their like are trained to do. Blame something relatively anonymous or that can’t defend it’s self (electronic scanning in this case), even when anyone with the technical knowledge knows things don’t work that way. They are Press Secretaries in the making. All they have to learn to qualify for that is the other tact of changing the subject – “But the other party is doing something else that is bad.

• Andy (JADAA)

  It is perhaps worth revisiting the fact that CHINFO and its PAO designator community are Public Relations experts, not journalists, no matter how much they say they are. Most career PAO-types belong to the PRSA,the Public Relations Specialists of America, NOT the SPJ, Society of Professional Journalists. That should, sadly, tell you everything you need to know.

• LT B

  Seeing what the journalists put out in the MSM, is “journalist” a better source of correct information? Especially with information regarding the military, I have found “journalists” to be less than correct.