Argus Correction

From the Argus:
The Argus ran an article today that says that the results of ASHA’s STI Clinic showed that three students tested positive for HIV. On behalf of the Argus Editorial Board, we would like to clarify that three students tested positive for STIs, not for HIV. We apologize to the Wesleyan community and to ASHA for this serious oversight on our behalf.
Adam Rashkoff ’13, author of the original article, also writes in to clarify:
The article that was published under my name on the front page of today’s paper contains an egregious editing error—it claims that three Wesleyan students tested positive for HIV. This is false, and I did not write this. The real story is that three students tested positive for STIs in general (could have been anything from chlamydia to gonorrhea), not HIV.
(7:40 edit by Zach)
  • Pingback: Let’s Talk About the Argus – Wesleying()

  • David

    However, it now appears that the story was wrong (though in not quite so spectacular a manner) before the editing screw up. A real newspaper would be more forthcoming about how the error occurred to. The Argus continues is record of being embarrassing.

  • David

    However, it now appears that the story was wrong (though in not quite so spectacular a manner) before the editing screw up. A real newspaper would be more forthcoming about how the error occurred to. The Argus continues is record of being embarrassing.

  • anon

    yeah the argus receives the most funding out of all student publications. and maybe it shouldn’t be bi-weekly at the cost of quality.

  • anon

    yeah the argus receives the most funding out of all student publications. and maybe it shouldn’t be bi-weekly at the cost of quality.

  • Anonymous

    @5, the paper DOES get financial support, and it’s not “100% percent voluntary for every member of the staff”–the editors in chief (who are almost certainly the ones responsible for this) get paid, as does the layout staff.

    @6, right on.

  • Anonymous

    @5, the paper DOES get financial support, and it’s not “100% percent voluntary for every member of the staff”–the editors in chief (who are almost certainly the ones responsible for this) get paid, as does the layout staff.

    @6, right on.

  • anon

    the argus gets 30-40 thousand dollars from the sbc you tard

  • anon

    the argus gets 30-40 thousand dollars from the sbc you tard

  • Anonymous

    The Argus needs to stop effing with its writers. The editing there sucks.

  • Anonymous

    The Argus needs to stop effing with its writers. The editing there sucks.

  • anonymous

    fine, you try to put together a bi-weekly campus newspaper that receives no financial or administrative support, provides no economic or academic incentive for those involved, and is 100% voluntary for every member of the staff. let’s see you produce the new york fucking times.

  • anonymous

    fine, you try to put together a bi-weekly campus newspaper that receives no financial or administrative support, provides no economic or academic incentive for those involved, and is 100% voluntary for every member of the staff. let’s see you produce the new york fucking times.

  • anonimouse

    @3, ditto

  • anonimouse

    @3, ditto

  • anon

    OH MY GOD I AM SO SICK OF THE ARGUS SUCKING

  • anon

    OH MY GOD I AM SO SICK OF THE ARGUS SUCKING

  • student

    agreed. especially when it was only 3 people….sort of seems like singling-out even though names weren’t mentioned

  • student

    agreed. especially when it was only 3 people….sort of seems like singling-out even though names weren’t mentioned

  • anon

    Why does the argus publish the results of our STI tests in the first place? Even though names aren’t used, it still seems like a bit of invasion of privacy, and it doesn’t actually reflect how many people on campus have STIs since not everyone is tested

  • anon

    Why does the argus publish the results of our STI tests in the first place? Even though names aren’t used, it still seems like a bit of invasion of privacy, and it doesn’t actually reflect how many people on campus have STIs since not everyone is tested