"Yesterday" the NYTimes reported a Union victory, which could have been true before, say, around 2:00 PM.
"Today" they report the route was not as bad as reported by some others.
That is also arguably true.
Astute participants/observers like Union Col. WT Sherman had nothing good to say about Union leadership, but still thought Union troops had courage.
In due time Sherman will help correct the Union's leadership problem.
In the mean time the NYTimes will soldier on, bringing as much of the truth as was fit to print... ;-(
A couple of random thoughts...
The fog of war played a part, as likely did the comportment of the reporter. I still vividly recall Jerry Rivers’ spellbinding war narratives (did any of them actually come true?).
Of course there’s always the matter of the agenda of the NYT - that agenda being the advancement of the NYT.