|
|
|
|
|
by davidhansen
5300 days ago
|
|
Not to say that the reporter(s) weren't being negligent here, of course. The quote, as reported, is so wildly divergent from the actual quote, that I wonder how you can think the reporter was "negligent", as opposed to "intentionally just making shit up for the purposes of creating controversy". This wasn't a case of one or two words out of place. I count 3 substitutions, 2 transpositions, 11 deletions, and 5 additions. In one sentence. That is not "negligence", no matter how many books written by yellow journalism apologists exist. |
|
> weth lik ON u wl ↑ that plat + mb even 1st
It doesn't make such a wide disparity excusable, but I've known enough reporters to have plenty of reason to believe it was negligence. Many reporters overestimate their ability to read their own notes later, much like programmers overestimate their ability to figure out WTF that clever bit of code is doing six months from now.