December 19, 2006
After Confederate Yankee noticed that the page briefly went down, an unacknowledged paragraph rewrite appeared:
AP reporters who have been working in Iraq throughout the conflict learned of the mosque incident through witnesses and later corroborated it with police.Luckily, USA Today didn't get the word, and still has the original copy posted:
AP reporters who have been working in Iraq throughout the conflict learned of the mosque incident through witnesses and neighborhood residents and corroborated it with a named police spokesmen and also through hospital and morgue workers.The "neighbors" and "hospital and morgue workers" copy has been expunged.
Why would the Associated Press try to change the record on a controversial story, especially one in which the AP's reporting has come into question? It's tough to come up with an innocent explanation for this one.
Update: Allahpundit at HotAir thinks that the quotes are from two different documents, but wonders why the supporting witnesses were left out of the later document. I'm not convinced that there were two documents. The copy is just too similar.
Posted by: Bluto at
02:38 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 222 words, total size 2 kb.
This just seems like a really stupid edit - reducing the number of sources they claim to have used to 'verify' the original story. Why do that? If the story were TRUE, why would they try this backdoor editing?
The only reason I can think of is that the AP has finally confirmed that the burning six story was false. The change to the press release is thus an attempt to change AP culpability from
1. "we have a whole cast of conspirators who all joined together to create this false story" OR
2. "our local stringers lied to us when they said they had confirmed the story with the hospital"
into the less malicious:
"we made a mistake by relying on just one source, who fooled us"
Posted by: wooga at December 19, 2006 03:55 PM (t9sT5)
Posted by: wooga at December 19, 2006 03:59 PM (t9sT5)
Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at December 19, 2006 04:13 PM (oC8nQ)
Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at December 19, 2006 04:16 PM (oC8nQ)
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at December 19, 2006 04:48 PM (vBK4C)
Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at December 19, 2006 04:53 PM (oC8nQ)
–There is no better retraction than when the MSM suddenly STOP talking about Qana, Red Cross bus ambulance “bombingsâ€, Isreali attacks on UNIFIL, Burned Sunnis, etc.
– That means you WON
– I have never seen them openly and fully admit to any significant falsehood, no matter how egregious
– They only retract typos, or small errors
– E.G., Waiting for the MSM retract their inverted reporting of the US victory in the Vietnam Tet offensive, which is still referred to as a failure by the MSM
– (Tet 1968, was key, because the US and South Vietnam DESTROYED the Viet Cong, leaving the war to the invading regular North Vietnam army. Thereafter, there were NO significant populist socialist Vietnamese “resistence freedom fighters†left – only millions of Communist invaders, who died rapidly as the US and South Vietnamese killed them, winning every significant battle)
– No one nailed the MSM hard enough, then or now, so they continue blithely falsifying Vietnam as a loss, with Tet as a “turning pointâ€
Posted by: DemocracyRules at December 20, 2006 01:34 AM (+WNUd)
The AP retroactively edited their fake story. Instead of issuing a retraction or correction, it's trying to cover its tracks. This isn't sloppy reporting, it's a deliberate attempt to deceive the public. It's obvious that the AP editors know the burning shite story is bogus.
I'm glad you guys are on top of this. I'd hate to see Carroll and crew weasel out of this one. I've been ignoring AP stories for years because of the glaringly obvious left-wing bias and phony sources, most of whom are unnamed.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 20, 2006 01:47 AM (bLPT+)
34 queries taking 0.0649 seconds, 163 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
