Reason #42. Bad editing.

In too many stories, you just can’t figure out what’s going on based on the information the paper gives you. It’s the editor’s job not to let that happen.

Here’s a good example. Vernon Parker, the mayor of Paradise Valley, who might run for governor, has been accused of wrongdoing by the federal government and is now suing for $2 million in damages. Fine. But read this precis in the paper, emphases added:

Parker, who heads his private consulting firm, VBP Group LLC, was accused of using his political influence to obtain an SBA contract, the claim says.

The SBA Inspector General’s Office began an investigation into the contract. It later published a report on the agency’s Web site that said Parker was a federal employee with the U.S. Department of Agriculture at the time of the contract application, and that federal employees are prohibited by law from competing for government contracts.
[…]
“The SBA’s Inspector General’s Office accused my client of inaccurate financial statements and an untruthful application for certification. All of those allegations, save one, have been thrown out,” attorney Paul Charlton said.

The story continues for a half-dozen grafs, but never explains a) whether in fact Parker applied for the grant while he was working for the agriculture department, an easily acertainable fact; or b) which allegation hadn’t been thrown out.

The reporter, Ofelia Madrid, evidently talked to Charlton; why didn’t she just ask him whether in fact Parker was working for the department at the time?