Accuracy in reporting

Yesterday, I pointed out that any media coverage of the trucking dispute would have to paint the companies as being in the wrong. I may have underestimated the ability of the dailies to euphemize their way away from accuracy in their headlines, even while the content of the articles tells the truth.

The Globe's headline suggests that the companies merely rejected "proposals", giving no hint that the proposals were from a third-party mediator...even though later on the story covers the fact of the matter:

"Since there is no deal, they are not going back to work," said Ken Halliday, a negotiator for about 1,200 independent short-haul truck drivers who have been on strike since June 27. The truckers parked their rigs to support calls for higher pay to offset the impact of soaring fuel prices.

Mr. Halliday said he was shocked by the results of yesterday's vote since transport company representatives were sitting across the table from the drivers when the terms were being negotiated.

"Now they are saying they can't afford it," he said.

And even the federal minister involved can tell which side has made some effort to reach a solution:

"The truck drivers have gone a long way to put their best foot forward and try to find a solution," Mr. Emerson said, noting his disappoint (sic) with yesterday's voting outcome.

Instead, the companies are now demanding a cooling-off period - presumably an end to the strike with no changes in the current terms of operation - while a task force examines possible solutions. Curiously, they seem to have left out any reason to think that the task force's findings will be given any more credence than those of the mediator.

The National Post's headline mentions that the deal was "scuttled", but doesn't point out who did the scuttling. The article then has some even more choice words from Emerson:

(Emerson) said the Ottawa had done everything the companies had requested to find a resolution to the dispute.

"Then they turned around and just gave us the finger," he said.

Now wouldn't that have been a catchier headline? Or for a more accurate one, wouldn't "Trucking companies reject mediator's settlement proposal" have done the job?

It's clear that the people paying close attention will know who's seeking a reasonable solution and who isn't. It's much less clear whether the public at large knows, thanks to the incomplete headlines at both national dailies.