By Laura Keil

Last week the Goat published an article about the changeover of IGA from private operation to corporate.
Unfortunately the article was not properly proofed and contained errors and omissions. The reporter reconsidered the article and revised the online version.

I wish to clarify what we did and why.

It is not that IGA is above criticism, and the Goat has published articles critiquing the store in the past. However the way in which this is done by journalists matters.

It is not because feelings were hurt that we chose to edit our article. It is because it didn’t meet our standard for journalism in the Goat. We strive to be balanced, fair, factual, and as unbiased as we can. This article critiqued without providing the critiqued party the opportunity to respond and it painted an entire group of people with the same brush. It was written in haste and not proofed, and I regret the impact that caused.

I want to be totally clear however, that the Goat doesn’t take this retraction lightly. We dive into controversial issues all the time and inevitably someone is discontent with the result. What matters is that we approach difficult issues through a neutral lens with fairness and balance of the various sides. Here this wasn’t adequately done.

There is no shame in admitting a mistake, and we are willing to do that. It is how we hold ourselves accountable.