NY Times Retracts John Roberts Memo Story

Editor & Publisher ^ | September 28, 2005 | Joe Strupp

[new yorker 77]

Correcting the FAKE NEWS is rare.

Producing the FAKE NEWS is common.

I expect more of this: NY TIMES --- Here's a FAKE POLL on the FAKE NEWS....

LOL

[alessandrofiaschi]

It's Bush fault!

[BoBToMatoE]

Fake.. But accurate.. hehe. Looks like Dan Rather got a job at the slimes. :)

[2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten]

This is now becoming a weekly occurence. Last week was Geraldogate, this week it's the Roberts retraction. Why anhyone would read this pathetic excuse for a newspaper is beyond me.

[Ben Mugged]

Let's go ice skating in hell......

[NonValueAdded]

Oh, the delicious irony ... in planting a story trying to weaken Roberts and likely help prop up Sullivan against future challenges, the NYT offers a contenporary example of why Sullivan is bad law. Sweeeeeeet.

[NonValueAdded]

contemporary, that is.

[frogjerk]

The correction did not explain if the paper took further efforts to authenticate the memo prior to the original story, saying only that "people quoted in the article discussed the Fein memorandum, provided to them by a reporter, on the assumption that it had been written by Judge Roberts."

RATHER: "In the interest of being truthful to the American people, I, Dan Rather, your humble reporter, have been subcontracted out by the NY Times to do fact checking on their stories. I'm sure this will lead to the most ethical and honest newspaper in the history of the universe..."

[Mo1]

What ... they got caught AGAIN reporting bogus stories???

Say it ain't so ... / sarcasm >

[Mad Dawgg]

"NY Times Retracts John Roberts Memo Story"

Interesting.

You've heard of "The Placebo Effect" and "The Butterfly Effect" the above story may be the first documented proof of the:

BUCKHEAD EFFECT

[frogjerk]

RATHER: Adam, here's the research on that Robert's memo...It's all ligit..."

[Cicero]

Obviously the reason Liptak never asked Roberts if he wrote the story was that Pinch Sulzberger wanted to produce an unpleasant surprise in the middle of the nomination hearings. They didn't want any warning to leak out.

Besides, the Times must have fired all its fact checkers and style editors years ago. Why else would they have so many lies and misspellings on the front page?

[End Times Sentinel]

Hey, get the story out, and later when it's discovered to be a lie, just retract it, the damage is done, mission accomplished.  And don't anybody start questioning motives either. 

Just like when the Philadelphia Inquirer ran that banner headline last week concerning the Cardinal and the Priest Abuse "report" - "Don't Read Report, Rigali Says" and then it turns out, "oops, honest mistake!  He never said that after all."  But throw whatever crap you have, real or made up, at your enemy and see what sticks.

Owl_Eagle

(If what I just wrote makes you sad or angry,

 it was probably sarcasm)

[Waverunner]

Gee - Does this mean that Chief Justice Roberts will have to recuse himself on cases involving the press?

People you don't want to piss off -
1. President
2. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
3. Any US Marine

[frogjerk]

Googling Adam Liptak turns up all kinds of B.S. this guy has been spouting for The NY Slimes and NPR. He must be part of the Hillary 08' Brigade...

[paulcissa]

New York Slimes Retracts John Roberts Memo Story

There. I fixed it for ya!

[BigEdLB]

Very Astute!

NY SLYMES - All the news fit to print, even if we have to make it up.

[frogjerk]

LIPTAK: "What, I'm supposed to find out if people actually said these things???? I don't get paid for that..."

[airborne]

Why anhyone would read this pathetic excuse for a newspaper is beyond me.

I'm sure all the liberals eat this crap up! The Slimes is just feeding their loyal parasites.

[LearnsFromMistakes]

I don't like this. An occasional correction might lead people to actually believe some of the other stories...