Quiet? Try silent.
Last week, The Washington Post’s ombudsman Patrick Pexton announced his departure:
Apropos of nothing, the @WashingtonPost just eliminated their ombudsman position. http://t.co/SoAptfvpUD
— China is lying (@jtLOL) March 5, 2013
How conveeeeeeenient. That’ll make it much easier for the WaPo to pull stunts like this:
http://twitter.com/adamsbaldwin/statuses/309002904038150144
The Daily Caller’s Gregg Re writes:
In a story by investigative reporter Carol Leonnig, the Post initially reported at 4:47 p.m. that “the women’s videotaped claims, with their faces obscured, were played on the conservative Web site The Daily Caller. The news site reported that ‘the two women said they met Menendez around Easter at Casa de Campo, an expensive 7,000-acre resort in the Dominican Republic.’”
But by late Monday evening, the paragraph had been changed to read, “the videotaped claims of two women, made with their faces obscured, were posted on the conservative Web site the Daily Caller” — making it ambiguous whether the two women who appeared in TheDC’s video are the same ones Leonnig identified as retracting their allegations against Menendez.
Yeah, nice of Leonnig to revise the story. Too bad she couldn’t be bothered to let anyone know that she’d made any revisions. Taking a page from the Buzzfeed Guide to Real Journalism, the article currently posted at washingtonpost.com does not contain an update or correction to reflect the changes. No wonder Buzzfeeder McKay Coppins is defending Leonnig:
https://twitter.com/mckaycoppins/status/309004051142549504
https://twitter.com/mckaycoppins/status/309010969428901889
Recommended
https://twitter.com/mckaycoppins/status/309011866154323968
https://twitter.com/mckaycoppins/status/309013886365999104
https://twitter.com/mckaycoppins/status/309014533152833537
So, basically, the WaPo got its facts wrong, tried to correct the goof without anyone noticing, got caught anyway, and that’s hunky-dory. Because, it doesn’t make the story wrong. Huh?
Dear @mckaycoppins, wouldn't WashPo surreptitious editing be a red flag that maybe their story is wrong? https://t.co/rQRegvJ9pA
— RBe (@RBPundit) March 5, 2013
So WashPo is changing the Menendez story, not telling anyone they're changing it, but @mckaycoppins still thinks the story is A-OK. HUH?
— RBe (@RBPundit) March 5, 2013
I like how you think I don't know you automatically gave WashPo the benefit of the doubt. Hilarious. @mckaycoppins
— RBe (@RBPundit) March 5, 2013
If you didn't think the WashPo story was correct, regardless of the shady edits, you wouldn't have written the last bit. @mckaycoppins
— RBe (@RBPundit) March 5, 2013
But please, play the "I'm smarter than you" card. This should be fun. @mckaycoppins
— RBe (@RBPundit) March 5, 2013
@NolteNC Ridiculously dishonest. "Doesn't mean their story is wrong." Now, "that's not what I said." LOL @mckaycoppins
— RBe (@RBPundit) March 5, 2013
I mean, it's not like WashPo wrote the story trying to debunk the DC story and then changed it. Oh, wait. They did. cc @mckaycoppins
— RBe (@RBPundit) March 5, 2013
They certainly did.
It's pretty simple: WashPo wrote the story in an attempt to debunk the Daily Caller story. Then they changed it. And told no one.
— RBe (@RBPundit) March 5, 2013
The Washington Post tries to pull a Jedi Mind trick to block and cover for Menendez.. "These are not the whores you're looking for".
— NeoKong (@The_NeoKong) March 5, 2013
https://twitter.com/SetonMotley/status/309020270256082945
Back in the old days, the Washington Post spoke truth to power. Now they try to overpower the truth.
— China is lying (@jtLOL) March 5, 2013
All in a day’s work.
***
Previously:
Join the conversation as a VIP Member