03-16-2021, 08:09 PM
(03-16-2021, 08:05 PM)GMDino Wrote: In other words "journalism" reported on the story and as more information has come to light the specifics have been noted and changed. As good journalism should do. It's like a police officer doing an investigation and finding out new, better evidence and changing how they approach the event they are looking in to.
No, it's not like that at all. When you quote someone and get it wrong that's a major error. There's also the issue with the retraction not being made until after the WSJ obtained the tapes. Now, your analogy would hold water if the police arrested someone with false information, quoting them as saying something they never said and then not owning it until a third party got ahold of the transcripts that proved the error.
