Washington Post corrects "Dems back down Story"
It was disheartening to say the least to read the headline "Dems back down Down" on Jonathan Weisman and Shailagh Murray's piece in Washington Post the day after Bush's veto.
Turns out, what they wrote simply wasn't true. Here's the undated correction that tops the piece today:
Now, an enormous number of press outlets ran with that story and opinion makers, including Karen Tumulty at TIME, used its content to shape their writing, and even, in Tumulty's case to smack down a reader. Problem was, the piece was factually wrong.
This buried correction can be welcomed in the "too little, too late" department...but the unanswered question for the Washington Post, its editors and its journalists is how did this false story end up a front page story in the first place? And, moreover, as awol notes in the comments below, why is Jonathan Weisman's piece in the today's Washington Post titled:
Democrats' Momentum Stalling
Anyone see a pattern here?
{More from Greg Sargent at the Horses Mouth.}
tags: Washington Post Jonathan Weisman Karen Tumulty Shailagh Murray MSM
Turns out, what they wrote simply wasn't true. Here's the undated correction that tops the piece today:
Correction to This Article
A May 3 Page One article about negotiations between President Bush and congressional Democrats over a war spending bill said the Democrats offered the first major concession by dropping their demand that the bill it include a deadline to bring troops home from Iraq. While Democrats are no longer pushing a firm date for troop withdrawals, party leaders did not specifically make that concession during a Wednesday meeting with Bush at the White House.
Now, an enormous number of press outlets ran with that story and opinion makers, including Karen Tumulty at TIME, used its content to shape their writing, and even, in Tumulty's case to smack down a reader. Problem was, the piece was factually wrong.
This buried correction can be welcomed in the "too little, too late" department...but the unanswered question for the Washington Post, its editors and its journalists is how did this false story end up a front page story in the first place? And, moreover, as awol notes in the comments below, why is Jonathan Weisman's piece in the today's Washington Post titled:
Democrats' Momentum Stalling
Anyone see a pattern here?
{More from Greg Sargent at the Horses Mouth.}
tags: Washington Post Jonathan Weisman Karen Tumulty Shailagh Murray MSM
Comments
1. This coalition is talking to democratic Congressional staff in conference calls every morning.
2. They have specifically targeted 57 house districts and Senators in nine states. (Might compare to the list that you put together on this site).
3. I love when the NY Times, after suggesting the way that this coalition is helping lead the dems toward a possible "short leash" strategy merely says, without any attribution, sourcing or specification, "members of the senate appear to be cool to the idea."
A story about soldiers overwhelmingly thinking a little torture and killing is no big deal, below the fold.
I guess that's why their readership is dropping off like flies after a visit from the Orkin man.
A-holes!
I don't think my coverage is without room for criticism by a long shot, but I truly welcome a chance to discuss and debate and ponder with minds like yours.
Thanks for visiting and your words.
paul
k/o