Integrity and Character (pt. 2)

It's amazing how an error in a small detail can ruin a masterpiece.
The story I wrote last week concerning Ward Connerly contained a few small errors that in no way changed the story, but I'm sure affected the credibility in the minds of those who were already skeptical. On one hand, I wish I wouldn't have made the errors, but at the same time I'm glad I learned the lesson I did.
One, when something is on your mind, follow through at that moment.
During my edit, I meant to check Connerly's title. The original story read that he is the University of California Regent. The truth is that he is the former regent.
Two, a bill is passed by legislature, but an initiative is citizen led. This may be general information, but I was exempt from taking government in high school because I passed whatever test that was required in middle school. As soon as I learned of this error, the "I'm just a bill" sitting on capital hill ran through my mind a million times.
Three, when there are errors in your story, it allows those who didn't liked what they said during an interview to portray you as incompetent and claim that other information in a story is be false. A guy, who shares a certain perspective of affirmative action with many of his same race and gender (feels sometimes he's punished for being a white male) gained some understanding when he saw his comments in print. However, the errors in my story ruined my credibility and allowed him to claim my portrayal of him was slighted. Whereas, if my story was accurate, my portrayal of him would have been better justified.
I knew that the only thing that happened was the guy was forced to face one of his unjustifiable biases and didn't want that image displayed publicly.
Disclaimer: I don't think the guy was racist, I don't think his view was unjustifiable, but I just wanted him to see that just as he feels he is punished for being a white male, many minorities feel they are being punished for who they are daily. I wanted him to be understanding and to see that just like he feels he is overlooked to put in a minority we have been overlooked due to nepotism, trying to compete in a culture that is not our own and are counted out when we won't conform. Also, we don't just get promoted due to raced based programs. We can sit in the same classes , learn the same things and be qualified for a job. But other factors - some already named - such as nepotism, racism and sexism and historical denial of needed resources and opportunities can prevent us from occupying successful positions. (No I didn't try to get all this across in the interview, Now I'm just venting)
If anything, the guy should be mad at those in high power (who mostly look like him), who make jobs scarce and influence the economy. Those who divide society based on class and keep those on the bottom in competition with each other.
(Obviously race is still a big issue. I reminded again by Wednesday's lecture when the fact that black people are poorly portrayed in the Missourian was discussed like it was a new issue. Sometimes I get tired of trying to get people to understand such issues, and chose to not to speak in class - especially because I've not spoken during any other class. Ex: If I ask a white friend to go to a predominantly black event, she might say she feels uncomfortable. Understandable. She might not fit in, she may not understand some things, the humor may not be funny to her. Now, think about how I feel everyday. Then think about a group of people who have never thought about how I, and others like me, may feel attempting to cover a day in my life - a possible disaster. Hence you have many racial biases in the Missourian, and race is definitely overlooked when covering stories.)