Request for Retraction

 
View this post on Instagram

TRUTH & TRANSPARENCY PART 2 Last week I posted about a National Geographic article that was published about my expeditions that was full of inaccuracies. The article, in addition to omitting key facts, misrepresents and fails to contextualize a number of items. I’ve spent the week organizing supporting materials including citations, URLS, photos, and emails etc. that clearly show the article was widely inaccurate. As promised, I sent this 16-page letter to the editors of National Geographic today, as well as made it public on my website. After thoroughly reviewing all these materials, I’ve decided not to ask for a correction, but instead to ask for a full retraction. In the spirit of transparency, you can follow the link in my bio to read the full letter and PDF of supporting documentation. I stand by every word in my book. I set off on The Impossible First expedition to test the limits of my own potential for personal growth while communing with the power and beauty of the earth. My larger purpose was to spread positivity in the world by sharing the adventure with students through my nonprofit, as well as with the general public, in hopes of inspiring others to be stewards of the environment and to realize that they have reservoirs of untapped potential inside of them to take on whatever challenges and adventures they desire. I remain committed to this purpose. Onward. #BePossible

A post shared by Colin O'Brady (@colinobrady) on

February 13, 2020  

Susan Goldberg
Editor In Chief 
National Geographic
1145 17th St NW
Washington DC  20036-4707


Dear Ms. Goldberg:

I respectfully write to request a retraction of the National Geographic article about me which was published on February 3, 2020. The article is widely inaccurate. It misrepresents a historic polar expedition by omitting key facts and fails to contextualize a number of items. My route and methods were announced publicly and were acknowledged as valid by polar experts and polar authorities who define the classification definitions of expeditions of this nature. The expedition was conducted with the utmost transparency as it was tracked on live GPS for anyone to observe in real time. It was followed very closely by reporters of the New York Times and other major media outlets who did their own fact-checking, none of whom found anything controversial with my crossing or route while it occurred.

The article delivers a false and misleading narrative, critiquing the expedition as not an “unassisted” crossing, and thus not a valid “first.” It claims that I “exaggerated” the dangers I faced during my expeditions. In addition, the article asserts that I do not recognize or credit Borge Ousland, one of the great Antarctic explorers, for his 1996-97 renowned crossing. All of these assertions are demonstrably incorrect. 

 This letter will show in detail, supported by citations and documentation that: 

  1. Antarctic Logistics and Expeditions (ALE) – provides clear classification definitions that confirm my expedition to be a solo, unsupported and unassisted crossing and a “first.” 

  2. The “unassisted” classification definition was strictly adhered to by both Captain Louis Rudd, the other individual attempting this same crossing at the same time, and me. We transparently shared our plans and our route which included the use of the Leverett Glacier SPoT “road”. We did exactly what we said we were going to do. This was acknowledged in writing by some of the same individuals who are quoted in the article now criticizing our route. 

  3. The “no rescue zone” is not an embellishment of the danger of crossing Antarctica, but rather a fact that has been reported by many highly regarded polar authorities who acknowledge, on the record, the challenges of plane rescue given certain terrain features and weather.  

  4. I have on many occasions publicly credited the great explorers who have come before me, especially Borge Ousland. This is evident in my book, on my website and in many of my social media posts. 

The reporter was provided documentation on all of the above information. Basic standards for fair reporting and fact checking were not followed. As an example, in the second paragraph in the article, two quotes are pieced together, one quote from page 214 of my book The Impossible First and another quote from page 50 of my book. The quotes from my book were about separate topics, but in the article they are represented as a singular misleading comment. [LINK] (See Appendix below for more details).

The only long form phone conversation I had with the reporter occurred over a year ago, in January 2019 following the completion of my expedition, in a completely different context. Through his process of reporting on this story, I only spoke to the reporter twice when he contacted me unscheduled. In this context we spoke briefly; once while I was boarding a plane and once for less than five minutes when I was between meetings on my book tour. Both times I asked if he wanted to schedule a formal long form interview, however both times he suggested an on the fly “quick call” was all that was needed. Given the length and depth of the article of which I am the subject, a formal long form interview would seem appropriate for fair and balanced reporting. 

I was never contacted by a fact checker, which in my other experiences with media and articles of this scope is common practice. 

I am providing citations, URLs, photos and emails as supporting information and evidence for your review and correction.  

I stand by every word in my book. 

Below, please see “Request for Retraction - Core Issues” and “Request for Retraction - Appendix.”


Thank you. 

 

Sincerely,

Colin O’Brady

 
ExpeditionJordan Shortcolin o brady