We just had someone start a thread because CNN is actively encouraging signup for news alerts on Kerry. After going ballistic and encouraging others to boycott CNN and their advertisers, it turns out that the article was about Kerry. On a similar article about Bush, they had the same signup for alerts on stories about Bush.
We just had someone start a thread because CNN is actively encouraging signup for news alerts on Kerry. After going ballistic and encouraging others to boycott CNN and their advertisers, it turns out that the article was about Kerry. On a similar article about Bush, they had the same signup for alerts on stories about Bush.
While you're right about some hysterical posters around here, you and logic (and morality, too) parted ways in the above post. It sounds like you'r saying that the guy is either: 1. Somehow shellshocked by FReeper charges of media bias; or 2. Because of hysteria among some on the right, leftwing media hysteria is ok.
The guy didn't make an error; he lied. The crowd didn't boo, it applauded. And the name of the URL was "crowd boos..." The whole point of the story was the lie; all the rest was window-dressing. And AP didn't correct the story, they hid it, as if it had never existed. A "corrected" story would at the very least be marked "revised." This one wasn't. And AP didn't notify all of its outlets that the story was wrong, or make a public acknowledgement of error. It is stonewalling, and many outlets are still carrying the fraudulent story.
According to your logic, so many people are breaking the law, that it would be unfair for cops to single out a minority of lawbreakers for arrest.