"Attention Wal-Mart Shoppers: We have a special on crow in aisle seven!"
Last week, I mentioned the story of a family with brand-new quadruplets and their struggles to get their tiny house expanded to fit. One solution involved them tapping into a nearby Wal-Mart's sewer line.
I lambasted Wal-Mart -- twice -- for blowing a great chance to score some good PR, to grab a chance to prove their slogan that "you couldn't have a better neighbor." The crux of my thesis was when the Lynches asked Wal-Mart for permission, they blew them off without an answer.
Great idea, great piece, only one flaw:
Wal-Mart DID answer. They said "no."
I'm not quite sure how I missed it, but it was quite clearly stated in the original story:
The couple, who spent $2,700 on an engineer to design a septic system, asked the giant retail chain for help. Wal-Mart said no.
Wal-Mart was taking its sweet time in explaining why it declined the family's request, but they are under absolutely no obligation to do so. In fact, the commenters on my pieces (and Paul's rebuttal) cited several very compelling reasons why they were probably wise to decline.
Sorry, folks, I screwed up. I have a bit of a dislike for Wal-Mart that I trace back to their attempt to take by eminent domain a hunk of property currently occupied by a regional discount retailer I rather like to build a SuperCenter. With that, I tend to have a rather jaundiced eye towards them. And it means that in this case, I didn't scrutinize the initial story as closely as I should have.
I guess I didn't learn the lesson from Rathergate -- the more something seems to confirm your prejudices, the more suspicious you ought to be. And if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
I can't promise it won't happen again, but I can promise I'll be a lot more paranoid about it happening again. And all of you who challenged and corrected me -- my thanks.
Permalink | E-mail This | Technorati Links | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Dumbasses
Comments (3)
Hmmm.*shrug* Frank... (Below threshold)1. Posted by ed | August 6, 2005 9:55 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hmmm.
*shrug* Frankly I don't this requires a mea culpa.
There's a lot of reasons to not like Wal-Mart. :)
1. Posted by ed | August 6, 2005 9:55 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 6, 2005 09:55
2. Posted by -S- | August 6, 2005 1:54 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Jay...if you'd ever lived in the Colorado Rockies where a Wal Mart -- that you got to by driving fifty miles through ice/blizzard/takeyourpick day/night -- was the only place you could buy groceries, engine oil and some longjohns and more gloves, you'd understand why Wal Mart serves certain areas of the country very well.
I can tell you that my monthly trips to the Wal Mart in Glenwood Springs, CO from upvalley was a mainstay. Because the nearest COSTCO is in Denver, a four-sometimes-seven hour drive from there, depending on the weather.
I sorta' sensed an added degree of rush-to-judgement in your earlier threads, but that's me.
2. Posted by -S- | August 6, 2005 1:54 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 6, 2005 13:54
3. Posted by Kevin | August 7, 2005 7:18 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Way to apologize! This is a perfet example of how many blogs rise above the MSM. If you get it wrong, just admit it. You cover tons of stories - no one can get it right every time.
Also, your apology was as big as your initial report. Very fair. Have you ever seen a newspaper retraction?
3. Posted by Kevin | August 7, 2005 7:18 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on August 7, 2005 07:18