New York Times Finally Retracts Clinton Story

[ProSense]

New York Times Finally Retracts Clinton StoryThe New York Times has finally retracted its flagrantly false story about Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY):

An article published on the Web site of The New York Times on Sunday reported on a speech by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in Rogers, Ark. The headline and article said that Mrs. Clinton had criticized Democrats on Saturday for “wasting time” by dealing with issues that helped Republicans turn out voters rather than finding consensus on mainstream subjects. The opening sentence of the article and the headline were based on a misinterpretation of a passage in her speech in which she first referred to the Democrats’ agenda in the Senate and then went on to criticize the actions of the Republican majority in Congress.

She was referring to the Republican-led Congress — not Democrats…

This is a victory for the progressive blogosphere, particularly Atrios, who first discovered the error, and Media Matters, which kept the story going. Some questions to consider:

– Why did it take the New York Times more than 48 hours to correct the record?

– Will right-wing news sites that picked up the story like Drudge Report and Newsmax correct the record for their readers?

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/07/18/clinton-retraction

[Pirate Smile]

1. Why did it take so damn long? Thankfully, we now have some organizations

at least calling them on their sh@#. It wasn't that long ago that there wasn't a Media Matters or Think Progress or Atrios to point out their screw ups.

[IndyOp]

2. Fair Call: Victory for the Progressive Blogosphere. Good job! (n/t)

[Vinnie From Indy]

3. The reporter's name was ANNE KORNBLUT - Never Forget That!

It is very hard to believe that this reporter made an honest mistake. To write an article that would appear on the front page of the NYT with the opening headline she used WITHOUT double checking for accuracy leaves little possibility for mistake on her part. Do they have chimpanzees as fact checkers at the NYT now?

[chimpymustgo]

4. Isn't she the one who wrote about the WH Correspondents' dinner WITHOUT

any mention of Steven Colbert?

[chieftain]

6. I don't think so, I think that was Elizabeth Busmiller (sp?)

[Catherine Vincent]

5. To answer your second question...hell no!

[creeksneakers2]

7. I give Kornblut the benefit of the doubt

I googles her other stuff and it didn't seem bad. She wasn't the only one who was confused by the speech.

[Reckon]

8. I like to think us DU'ers helped get that retracted..

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[oasis]

9. Horray for Atrios, Media Matters and Hillary.

:applause:

[grannylib]

10. It'll probably increase the calls for death for NYT publishers/editors,

since only treasonous left-wingers would ever want to be honest, particularly about Hillary...I mean, isn't it in the Constitution somewhere that hating Bill and Hillary Clinton is a requirement of all real true patriotic 'Murkins???

The fucking Reich Wing spent 8 years hating them both (and trashing their daughter too, talk about 'family values...') and now that the eminently hate-able Chimpy the Unelected Imbecile is getting called on his hateful policies and actions, they're finding out that getting back some of thier own medicine is no fun....WAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH! WAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!! Poow wittow hewpwess powerwess defenswess wePigwicans! Awwwwwwwwwwwwww.

My liberal heart is NOT bleeding for them.

[gristy]

11. Possible solution: Democrats speak in sentences of 5 words or less, and

pause several seconds between sentences. Would that help?

[BrightKnight]

15. No, just provide a talking points memo to avoid any confusion.

Every major organization should be sent a daily Democratic talking points memo. Fight fire with fire.

[AtomicKitten]

12. regardless of what people think of HRC

this is what we have to look forward to in 2008

same old shit, different election

[Sparkly]

13. Once they establish the lie, there's no turning it back...

It takes refuting it over, over, and over again at the grassroots, on the net, and even in forums like DU...

I've seen it happen with crap "mistakenly" written and published at the NYTimes, WaPo, and others about Al Gore, Wesley Clark, and John Kerry...

We can refute it FOREVER -- but once they put it out there, it gets picked up and there is NO amount of "correcting" that will get beyond it.

Very, very frustrating.

At this point, I think the energy might be better spent propagating the TRUTH about Republicans than trying to correct lies about Democrats.

[Supersedeas]

14. not that the NY Times cares about clarifying - kudos to the blogosphere