Inner City Press: Watchdogging and Taking Action Since 1987

Objections and, in places, Corrections

Updated Jan. 22, 2007

  Generally, it is Inner City Press' policy to make corrections where warranted on the web page on which the article to be corrected is and remains located, and to then note that the page has been edited. Recently the UN Development Program has requested instead stand-alone corrections. While some of UNDP's below-requested corrections seem more in the nature of disagreements of opinion (such as the book reviews of Dec. 4, 2006, and Jan. 15, 2007, of "UNDP: A Better Way?"), we ran the first corrections-request in full and without comment, except where indicated by italics, in the interest of receiving more timely responses from UNDP going forward.

From UNDP, cassandra.waldon [at] undp.org wrote:

...We are sending you, below, a list of retractions and corrections we are hereby requesting... 

--After we made it clear that the UNDP history book was given full editorial independence, you published a headline on December 4 stating: "UNDP Spent $567,000 on a Book to Praise Itself." Note: This characterization was adopted by London's Sunday Telegraph of Dec. 17, 2006; it is not clear if UNDP has requested a correction, but none has been made. These are book reviews.

--After we made it clear that William Orme’s job change is not a demotion, you mischaracterized that move, in part with an anonymous defamatory email.  

--You state repeatedly that "[UNDP’s] chief executive Kemal Dervis has not held a press conference in 14 months." For the record, Kemal Dervis has held several full press conferences and met scores of journalists across the globe during this time. Note: Mr. Dervis did not hold a press conference in UN Headquarters from August 2005 through December 21, 2006 -- at which time he described, for example, a lengthy meeting with the editorial board of the Financial Times, which we note. Mr. Dervis also at the press conference projected when he would return, and said he would endeavor to release budgets of the Administrator's discretionary spending. That said, UNDP's response has been prominently inserted, click here to view.

--On December 5 you stated that 'UNDP states that publishing what its employees say, particularly if they are critical of higher officials in UNDP, is 'reprehensible'." This is not accurate. In our email—currently posted at http://www.innercitypress.org/UNDPemails.html—we stated the following: "Publishing anonymous, defamatory allegations from UNDP staffers, and those who purport to be UNDP staffers, is reprehensible."  Here is an example of where you have willfully distorted our response. Note: while we call it paraphrasing -- particularly since UNDP's actual message was noted in full -- duly noted.

--On December 2, Inner City Press twice stated that UNDP had failed to respond to questions by an "end-of-Friday" deadline. This "end-of-Friday" deadline was never indicated to us—you told us only that you were "very much on deadline."

--After we explained that Brian Gleeson’s re-assignment was not a demotion, on December 6 you again mischaracterized his move.  Note: See the Dec. 19, 2006 follow-up story on Mr. Gleeson, click here to view.

--On December 6 you stated that "A snapshot from the Mark Malloch Brown era offered by staff involves expenditure of millions on a "re-branding" campaign, with a new logo and statement and even web site templates. Within months the campaign and templates were forgotten." This is not true. The unveiling of the new logo in 2002 was the most visible element of the re-branding effort, all the major elements of which continue to be very much in use.  

--As we have already made clear to you, communications positions at UNDP are not rotational. The suggestion, in an anonymous defamatory email posted December 4, that there is something irregular in the length of time Cherie Hart has served as a Regional Communications Officer in Bangkok, and that Mark Malloch Brown has in any way been involved, is incorrect.

Update of Jan. 22, 2007: UNDP wrote that "the January 10 posting includes a photo caption that reads, “Dervis: 468 trust funds, audits withheld, no answers for a month.” This is inaccurate, as Mr. Dervis answered your questions at a press conference December 21. Our office has answered several of your questions in the past month. Please correct this error. In the same posting, the statement that “UNDP has, with the single exception of UNDP's Global Environmental Facility's Goa junket, refused to answer any of Inner City Press' questions for the past month,” is inaccurate. We answered a number of your questions on December 14. Both Mr. Dervis and Mr. Melkert answered your questions at press conferences in December. Please correct this error." Both have been modified to "20 days" instead of a month; the audits are still be withheld, click here for more.

[UNPD wrote: "In the January 9 posting and previous postings, the characterization of UNDP as an 'agency out of control' is inaccurate, as is clear from its well-documented internal and external audit controls, its reporting to its Executive Board, and the extensive systems it has in place for whistleblowing and airing grievances. While Inner City Press has every right to express its opinion, that opinion should be clearly marked as such.  In the same posting, the statement that 'UNDP expects that there will be no discussion of its 2006-2009 country plans for such regimes as Zimbabwe and North Korea,' is inaccurate. Plans for UNDP work in North Korea and elsewhere are on the agenda for discussion by UNDP’s Executive Board at its meetings later this month."

NOTE: In light of the UNDP-North Korea press conference of Jan. 19, it appears that UNDP must now expect discussion of North Korea, since the five-requesting nations standard we reported on Jan. 9 has been met. UNDP's statements about its audit controls, etc., are disputed by its largest donor and by, among others, the Wall Street Journal. Inner City Press will await a showing if and when UNDP requests, and more pertinently, receives, correction(s) from the Wall Street Journal.]