I found it very easy to relate to the idea in It Ain't Necessarily So that information may be published in a different context than it was meant to be. I will tell you all a little story. It all happened on the worse week of my college career thus far...I wrote an article in the Setonian and I recieved an email from my Editor saying I misunderstood a comment an interviewee said and the interviewee wanted to talk to me. Fear struck and just think, this wasn't an issue of life or death I screwed up, but it still made a difference to the story.
So when this book talks says, "In this chapter we'll look at some examples of stories that became bigger than they should have been when reporters did not confuse their readers (or, perhaps, themselves) with some of the relevant facts." I was reminded of how something a writer may not understand, may turn into a different idea. In my case the story didn't get bigger, but I was embarrassed to see the mistake I made and learned from it. It all goes back to "verify or duck". If the writer doesn't exactly understand it, shouldn't they verify or ask the source. Than again when it comes to scientific writing, which I am now terrified of, who do you know if you do need to verify it? Ahhhhhh!!! It is all very confusing! Mistakes are much easier than I had imagined when it comes to news writing!
I will just have to accept that journalism will not always be perfect, journalist are only human--not all of them can be Superman!