Correction should have been more prominent

While the front page of The Constitution (Thursday, 9 August, 2021) article on COVID incidence at CCMH stated the numbers clearly, a bolded, large-font, standalone statement of CORRECTION should have been published to make it indisputable that the statistics in yesterday’s paper (Wednesday, 8 August, 2021, page 1A) were incorrect and dangerously misleading.

I understand how the error could have been published: The Constitution writers are pushed to the limits because the staff is small and there are so many important stories to write about right now, and there is not a resident copy editor (again, I presume, because of staff reductions over the last couple of years).

However, the damage done by the misstating of vaccinated vs unvaccinated statistics was grist for the mill of anti-vaxxers searching for statistics supporting their misguided stance. The Constitution has a civic and moral responsibility to make sure that the reading public has been made aware that the previous day’s statement concerning the incidence of vaccinated versus unvaccinated patients at CCMH was the polar opposite of the reality.

Incidentally, where are the statistics for Southwestern Medical Center?

Frantzie Couch

Lawton

EDITOR’S NOTE: It is the policy of The Lawton Constitution to correct errors in a prompt and timely manner. The story with the wrong vaccination numbers was corrected online as soon as we were made aware of the error. It has been a long-standing policy that corrections in the print edition run on the Almanac page.