It’s official Joe Biden becomes the 46 President of the United States.

[D.B. Cooper]

Well said, Ben. It's nice to see that we sometimes agree.

RT also picked up this story, with Helen Buyniski penning a somewhat acerbic commentary -

Democracy Dies in Darkness: Washington Post backtracks after it's caught burying Kamala Harris’ cringeworthy joke from old article

The Washington Post has restored a tone-deaf anecdote mocking prisoners’ suffering to its rightful place introducing a profile on the sister of then-candidate (now VP) Kamala Harris, after getting called out for removing it.

www.rt.com

RT (Russia Today) news is Russian based state funded news agency.
Do you really think they’re going to report fair and unbiased news events happening in the US?

 

[lunar]

Do you really think they’re going to report fair and unbiased news events happening in the US?

Do you know any unbiased and fair USA news sources these days?

 

[ben]

RT also picked up this story, with Helen Buyniski penning a somewhat acerbic commentary -
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/513405-harris-wapo-buried-joke/

RT (Russia Today) news is Russian based state funded news agency.
Do you really think they’re going to report fair and unbiased news events happening in the US?

To be very clear: This idiotic f-up notwithstanding, as a general rule the US MSM on its worst day, is more credible -

• than NYP, and the better parts of Fox on most days,
• and the rest of Fox, OAN, RT and all the rest on their best days.

In fact, this is actually illustrated by this goofy example.

See what happened here: After the Washington Post quietly changed (“updated”) an 18-month-old article(!) -

• Reason put up a piece in short order pointing out the change.
• It percolated rapidly across social media.
• It was picked up by Fox and the NY Post, and then by Snopes and others.

Within just over 48 hours, the Post itself had to back down:

• The text at the top, “This story has been updated from an earlier published version”, now links to the original version.
• They also put up a piece by one of their opinion writers, quoting their spokeswoman about the incident.
  • This piece tried to offer some context and explanations, both of which were pretty flimsy IMHO. But -
  • Ultimately, both the spokeswoman quote as well as the piece itself acknowledged it was the wrong thing to do:

Kris Coratti, a spokeswoman for The Post, told this blog in an email: “[...] we should have kept both versions of the story on The Post’s site (the original and updated one), rather than redirecting to the updated version. We have now done that, and you will see the link to the original at the top of the updated version.”​

​

None of that is to say this wasn’t a screw-up on the part of The Post. It surely was: Newspapers invest in campaign feature writing to create lasting accounts of how politicians respond to the rigors of seeking office. Leave good journalism alone.​

===================

Finally, snark like this notwithstanding -

Does it surprise you to discover this?

Do you know any unbiased and fair USA news sources these days?

- the fact that this fairly minor kerfulle is even news, is proof enough of the importance of credibility in the media.

Many publications outside the MSM do this all the time, and nobody except journalism and politics junkies even notices. It’s just not newsworthy. It isn’t really news. The Washington Post does this? It makes the headlines.

That tells you all you need to know.

 

[Alby]

Please, characterize the question however you like. It doesn't matter. But I ask it again: did it surprise you? And a follow-up: why did the WaPO do what they did?

"The fact that this fairly minor kerfulle is even news, is proof enough of the importance of credibility in the media." You made it news on this website, for reasons that don't seem entirely clear.

 

[artisans]

The desperation of clinging to a shred of culpability, like a Gym Jordan or that loser that denied losing.

 

[camberiu]

You can try discrediting RT as much as you want. But many liberals KNOW that Kamala Harris is no friend of poor colored people, specially when they get caught by the US criminal justice system. She has and will continue to use them, even kill them if need be, to advance her political career.

 

[Renzi]

Do you know any unbiased and fair USA news sources these days?

Bland, but fact-based non-corporate news:

PBS NewsHour

PBS NewsHour is a public media news organization with a nightly hour-long television broadcast and a robust digital footprint across the web and social media. Anchored by managing editor Judy Woodruff, the NewsHour features the latest news, analysis, field reports from around the world, live...

www.pbs.org

 

[D.B. Cooper]

Bland, but fact-based non-corporate news:

PBS NewsHour

PBS NewsHour is a public media news organization with a nightly hour-long television broadcast and a robust digital footprint across the web and social media. Anchored by managing editor Judy Woodruff, the NewsHour features the latest news, analysis, field reports from around the world, live...

www.pbs.org

Thank you. When I lived in NYC I used to listen to NPR.org. My favorite radio station.
I found them to be overall fair and balanced in their reporting.

 

[ben]

But I ask it again: did it surprise you?

I don’t think my surprise or lack thereof is the point.

I am comfortable saying that I give very few people, and even less organizations, an inherent benefit of the doubt.

That being said, this kind of bad judgment is not something that happens often at WaPo.
As I said, it makes headline news - see the amount of outlets that published entire pieces about this revision.

And a follow-up: why did the WaPO do what they did?

I don’t know.

It’s an excellent question, an important one. Someone knows the answer, and I hope that some journalist is looking for that answer.

You made it news on this website, for reasons that don't seem entirely clear.

That sounds like a mischaracterization.

I mentioned it in the context of talking about trust and credibility when it comes to the media. A democracy cannot function without being informed, and thus the question of whom to trust is kinda important.

And of course, the undermining of trust in most media except the one favorable is a core component of some of the major actors.

And the amount of outlets that published an entire piece concerning another outlet’s revision of a very old piece is exactly the point here.

 

[ben]

You can try discrediting RT as much as you want. But many liberals KNOW that Kamala Harris is no friend of poor colored people, specially when they get caught by the US criminal justice system. She has and will continue to use them, even kill them if need be, to advance her political career.

Sure. But the MSM did a fine job of conveying those concerns.

Not sure what is your larger point. Even propaganda outlets sometimes get the story right. Does that mean that we should not bear in mind that they are propaganda outlets? Or do you dispute that RT is accurately described as such?