Cameron Barr, senior managing editor of the Washington Post, issued a statement defending “accomplished and diligent journalist” Taylor Lorenz “whose reporting methods comport entirely with The Washington Post’s professional standards.” Barr goes on to claim, “We did not publish or link to any details about her personal life.”
Statement from @cameronbarr re: reporting from @TaylorLorenz pic.twitter.com/RsGw950t78
— Kristine Coratti Kelly (@kriscoratti) April 19, 2022
That’s funny, because as Twitchy reported earlier this morning, plenty of people noted that the Post had stealth-edited the piece to remove a link to Libs of Tik Tok’s real estate license:
The WaPo article by Taylor Lorenz originally linked to the real estate license for the person behind the Libs of TikTok account— the link listed the person’s name, real estate license number, possible physical address, etc. WaPo only removed the link after being called out on it.
— Jerry Dunleavy (@JerryDunleavy) April 19, 2022
But, the Post didn’t link to any details about her personal life.
You know you’re lying.
— Jessica O’Donnell (@heckyessica) April 19, 2022
The last claim is false. The original story had a link to her professional license complete with an address for her. @washingtonpost later stealth-edited it out of their article. This dishonesty seems of a piece with the whole report.
— Ed Morrissey (@EdMorrissey) April 19, 2022
This is a lie. The original article, before the Washington Post edited it after publication, contained a link to Libs of TikFok’s full name and personal address alongside her real estate license number and employer details. There is no notice of retraction either.
— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) April 19, 2022
Here is @TaylorLorenz ’s WaPo piece on the WaPo site clearly linking (highlighted, I cropped out the URL it directs to) @libsoftiktok ’s real estate license and personal address before they stealth-edited it. @kriscoratti and @cameronbarr are ridiculous, shameful liars. pic.twitter.com/nPUpXYvPmv
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) April 19, 2022
Except you did post details about her personal life and you got caught.
I'd ask whether you have shame, but because this is The Washington Post, none of you do and don't care what happens to @libsoftiktok, her livelihood, or family members.
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) April 19, 2022
When you lie this brazenly, it makes us wonder what else you're lying about.
— Bethany S. Mandel (@bethanyshondark) April 19, 2022
That’s a lie. Original story linked to her address. You are liars.
— Cernovich (@Cernovich) April 19, 2022
So cool how the moral betters get to delete content so they can put out a back-patting statement!
— Doctor of Coding Thinkology (@bradcundiff) April 19, 2022
Democracy dies when the media lies.
— Christina Pushaw 🇺🇸 (@ChristinaPushaw) April 19, 2022
This is an absolute lie
Can you people not tell the truth about anything?
— The H2 (@TheH2) April 19, 2022
This is a lie, the original article linked to her real estate license which contained her address
— Will Chamberlain (@willchamberlain) April 19, 2022
These people think they can memory-hole everything. It’s terrifying.
— Shaun Livingston, I presume (@alouie14) April 19, 2022
Original edition of this article did include a link to her real estate license.
— Zaid Jilani (@ZaidJilani) April 19, 2022
Original edition??? Are you saying the article was edited after publication?
A legitimate journalist would include an editor’s note, yet there is none on this article.
What does that mean? @washingtonpost
— Alan R. Levy (@alanesque) April 19, 2022
Will you be fact checking this, @GlennKesslerWP?
— Shane (@shaner5000) April 19, 2022
This is false.
We all know its false.
— mitrebox (@mitrebox) April 19, 2022
Legitimate journalism stands on its own. It never requires a statement like this. You know it. We know it.
— Jason Heard (@jmheard15) April 19, 2022
Does telling a source "you're being implicated as starting a hate campaign" in order to pressure them into responding comport entirely with WaPo's professional standards?https://t.co/JRa2Mgp1Op pic.twitter.com/LmADN67zfN
— Jeryl Bier (@JerylBier) April 19, 2022
Enjoy the ratio.
— Notorious B.O.G (@Orangeagent21) April 19, 2022
Bullshit. We all saw the link before you removed it.
Washington Post is unethical trash.
— Avi Yemini (@OzraeliAvi) April 19, 2022
How many times was the article edited, and WHY IS THERE NOT A SINGLE EDITOR’s NOTE REFLECTING THE ARTICLE WAS EDITED? @washingtonpost
— Alan R. Levy (@alanesque) April 19, 2022
Lies, you have updated and removed the links to her real estate license information.
— Lady_RBF (@Lady_RBF) April 19, 2022
I’m just here to watch everyone call out your blatant and evil lies.
— Five Times August (@FiveTimesAugust) April 19, 2022
Jerry Dunlavey posted screenshots of the link to her real estate license and the same sentence after the link had been removed. So is that not considered personal information or is Barr just lying?
* * *
Update:
I have followed up with @washingtonpost to ask if they do not consider a real estate license with license number, full name, address, and employer to be “personal information” and if not, why the link was removed https://t.co/eIVLy8JAFK
— Amber Athey (@amber_athey) April 19, 2022
Related:
Washington Post clearly hopes you won’t notice how they aided and abetted Taylor Lorenz in endangering Libs of Tik Tok’s life [screenshots] https://t.co/PXoiHFq7Dm
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) April 19, 2022