Fox News gets it all wrong about "Michael Moore bodyguard"

And they have yet to retract the story. The faux news network which was shaprly critical of CBS and Dan Rather in recent months, promoted a story yesterday which gleefully announces the arrest of Michael Moore's bodyguard at JFK airport. In three short paragraphs, Faux made all of the errors mentioned in the following letter of clarification sent out by the firm which actually employs Patrick Burk (note that Fox even spelled his name wrongly as 'Burke'):

Dear Editors:

Our firm employs Patrick Burk.

Fox News has now removed the link for this story from their home page; their original story contained several errors (below). We want to be certain you are aware of the appropriate corrections.

I know that Fox News editors must rely upon others when preparing their stories, and I offer with no judgment that their story titled “Michael Moore’s Bodyguard Arrested on Airport Gun Charge” contains several errors, including its entire headline.

Please correct the errors in your story below as soon as possible, because, as you are aware, the errors reach an ever-widening audience with each passing minute - and will predictably be picked up by other news agencies.

Our full-time employee, Patrick Burk, is not “Michael Moore’s bodyguard.” Accordingly, the headline in the Fox News Web site story is false and misleading.

If you believe Patrick Burk was ever assigned to protect Michael Moore, or any number of other public figures, you might accurately report that “A bodyguard who was once assigned to protect Michael Moore...”

You could as accurately say “A bodyguard that was once assigned to protect President Clinton,” because Patrick Burk has also been assigned to protect President Clinton in the past - but you wouldn’t be accurate if you said “President Clinton’s Bodyguard.”

Patrick Burk is not Michael Moore’s bodyguard, nor was he protecting Michael Moore or in any way involved with Michael Moore on Wednesday night, when he (Burk) was checking in at JFK for a flight to Los Angeles.

When checking in for the flight, Patrick Burk voluntarily advised United Airlines that he was transporting an unloaded, locked firearm in his checked luggage, precisely as regulations require, and not “carrying” a weapon, as your story inaccurately reports. Advising the counter ticket agent is a routine procedure for police officers and security professionals. In this case, a Port Authority officer decided to arrest Patrick Burk on the charge that he is not licensed to carry a firearm in New York City.

The Fox web site headline contains an error not present in the story. The headline indicates that Patrick Burk was arrested on an “airport gun charge.” He was not. The charge involves having a firearm without a New York City License to carry it. On that note, Patrick Burk was not carrying a weapon on his person (only locked in his baggage), and the police do not allege that he was carrying a weapon on his person, as your story implies.

Police, security professionals, sportsmen, and citizen gun owners who fly on the Nation’s airlines are legally bound to advise the airlines of firearms in their checked baggage - and the firearms are transported just like any other baggage.

The Fox News story also says Patrick Burk was carrying “an unlicensed firearm.” Please correct that error. Patrick Burk’s firearm is legally registered to Patrick Burk - it is not “unlicensed.” Patrick Burk is licensed to carry a firearm in several States, and a court will determine if any charge is appropriate for Patrick Burk in this matter, which involves New York City.

Though I realize a Michael Moore connection would be of interest to your web site, Patrick Burk is not Michael Moore’s bodyguard, and has never been employed by Michael Moore.

An important note for you is that Patrick Burk is not a public figure and even the smallest inaccurate detail that is widely disseminated could predictably interfere with his ability to pursue his profession. Patrick Burk is a former Marine who served with distinction in an elite and specialized Marine unit, and he protected, among others, then-President Clinton.

Our firm provides protective coverage for public figures and others, and Patrick Burk is a leading professional in his field.

I highlighted in red below the specific errors where they appear in the Fox News story.

Sincerely-

Gavin de Becker

And did Fox retract the story? Publish a correction? Take the errant story off of their website? Of course not (even though the third from the last paragraph of the above letter seems to point toward a lawsuit for defamation); here is the Faux story STILL:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,144921,00.html

So Faux has seen fit to lie about a decorated Marine in their rush to smear Michael Moore. What I would love to see is Burk, the Marine suing Faux news for defamation. Even Faux's Moore-hating viewers would see this as the sliming of a law-abiding ex-Marine.

And no, Fox isn't likely to retract a story this juicy (lack of facts notwithstanding).

got a link ofr this letter?

He listed the main De Becker site but I don't see the letter there now. http://www.gavindebecker.com/index.cfm

I'm still looking and can PM the poster. Other thread is here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2979184#2984710

:hi:

They seem to get out of alot of these messes, don't they?

bricks it's been throwing heaved back at them.

Here's the link to the home page: www.mediamatters.org

They'll get on top of this right away..

I just did.

and filling up long threads based on their trash.

How many people read that thread yesterday and now believe Michael Moore is a hypocrite who has thugs who bring unlicensed guns to the airport whenever he flies???

Makes me want to spit!

I told it wasn't true and she still believes faux is the only real news out there - simply hopeless.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2981905&mesg_id=2981905

They should be ashamed.

I'm dying for a credible link to throw this in someones face.

http://moorewatch.com/index.php/weblog/correction_to_moores_bodyguard_story

An anti-Moore website posted the retraction letter that they received. Faux news has failed to act as responsibly (a relative term in this instance).

for those that only saw yesterday's version of this story.

He goes on the air with a story which "could not be proven true," but ALSO could not be proven false - and heads roll.

Fox makes blatant "National Enquirer" claims, exaggerations... and they not only refuse to retract, but they keep the story on their site???

Aww...I know,just a simple mistake unlike the Dan Rather incident....