03-17-2021, 11:16 AM
(03-17-2021, 02:40 AM)TheUberHuber Wrote: This is the false premise. They were not erroneous at all. Pretty similar to what was actually said.
This statement pretty much reveals you don't know what a "quote" is.
(03-17-2021, 09:02 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: https://www.ajc.com/politics/georgia-official-clarifies-earlier-report-on-trump-call-to-a-georgia-investigator/WQPJG3F7MJEJ7EQJHLNVUEGYLY/
I remember a lot of responses to his call with the Secretary of State which was accurate as it was the audio released by the Secretary of State.
I don't remember this one, but according to that article, the investigator to whom Trump spoke to was the one who characterized the call that way and their office put out the report that was then repeated by the media. Your issue seems to be with the Georgia officials, not the media that immediately corrected their story after it was revealed that the report that the officials put out was erroneous.
No, my issue is with the Post putting out a story with inaccurate quotations. Not only that, but it took another media outlet to actually investigate the story before they issued any kind of correction. I've trained many officers, and one of the biggest things I emphasize with them is that if you quote someone in a report then you better damn well ensure the quote is accurate, otherwise you can destroy a whole investigation. Now, such an investigation, potentially, has profound consequences for those involved (e.g. victim, suspect). But a national news story about the presidential election? That, potentially, has profound consequences for the whole nation. But it appears I'm in the minority on this one.
