When is a Scandal Downgraded to an Uproar? When The Washington Post Changes the Headline (NCPAC)

Saturday, February 12, 2005 | Kristinn

[GeronL]

You should know how it works, you've read Orwell's '1984' I bet.

[GeronL]

But considering they seem to be trying to claim the 'rumor' started here on FR, since that can be proven false, just how much trouble can they get into?

You mean sue them?

[Darksheare]

Was hoping for something worse, like jail time for one of their 'reporters'.

[GeronL]

I would doubt that. running fake news articles is apparently not a criminal offense.

[Darksheare]

Yeah, after Dan Rather you'd think I'd have learned that.
*sigh*

[GeronL]

There is no legal requirement for the media to report the facts accurately just as schools are not legally required to do any educating

[Darksheare]

Like I said, you'd think I'd have learned by now.
*chuckle*

[dangus]

Sorry, gotta agree with the late edit. No credible assertion was made; there's no grounds for calling it a scandal. OTOH, they would never have corrected themselves is conservatives had objected to a headline.

[nicmarlo]

I find this rather curious, especially in light of my interview with David Snyder of The Post last Thursday for this article. I told him one of the reasons for wanting to archive stories on Free Republic was the habit of the news media to change published versions of stories to suit a political agenda.

Revisionists hit again.

[ArmyBratproud]

guess the newspaper guys woke up to the fact that sooner, rather than later.......it going to be found out that MD4Bush may have been working with them....

And they will take a major hit...