In his Saturday column, Toronto Star Ombudsman Don Sellar writes about a how a start-up allowance for refugees was misinterpreted by a reader, who then spread his misinterpretation far and wide on the Net. But then the Star's letters page helped perpetuate the new myth by printing a letter to the editor on it.

An excerpt:

In quick order, two things happened after the article ran(note: The story dates back to March).

First, a reader sent a nasty e-mail to the reporter. Among other things, it said charity begins at home and Canada should not "roll out the welcome mat" for refugees.

The e-mailer assumed — erroneously — that the refugees would collect $2,470 a month. They'd be better off than Canadian pensioners.

More worrisome, the polemicist sent his rant to 100 recipients, some of whom likely spread the word to wider audiences.

Ah, the wonders of the Internet!

Alarmed by the e-mail, reporter Keung tried to contact the sender. It was too late. Having spread the misinformation, the e-mailer already had changed his address. At the same time, a second development occurred.

The Star ran a letter to the editor that said the $2,470 "compares very well to a single pensioner who after contributing to the growth and development of Canada for 40 years can only receive a monthly maximum of $1,012 in old age pension and Guaranteed Income Supplement. "Maybe our pensioners should apply as refugees?" reasoned the writer.

Sellar said for months afterward, the Star would get notes from readers citing the letter to editor as "proof" of Canada's excessive generosity to refugees.

In hindsight, the ombud now wishes he'd issued a speedy clarification to help set the record straight.

But with information (and misinformation) moving at warp speed on the Internet, I doubt there was a silver bullet for the problem.