Sunday, September 14, 2008

Washington Post distorts Palin; then rewrites without telling readers

The other day I posted Not for the first time Washington Post distorts Palin. Now I want to tell you what happened after that. It doesn’t reflect well on WaPo’s Anything for Obama journalists.

Here’s my original post followed below the double star line by what happened next.

Bill Kristol at Weekly Standard Blog with my comments below the star line -

Kristol begins - - -

Here are the headline and the first two paragraphs from an article posted online that apparently will be on the front page of Friday’s Washington Post:

“Palin Links Iraq to 9/11, A View Discarded by Bush"

By Anne E. Kornblut Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, September 12, 2008; A01

FORT WAINWRIGHT, Alaska, Sept. 11 -- Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would "defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans."

The idea that Iraq shared responsibility with al-Qaeda for the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, once promoted by Bush administration officials, has since been rejected even by the president himself. On any other day, Palin's statement would almost certainly have drawn a sharp rebuke from Democrats, but both parties had declared a halt to partisan activities to mark Thursday's anniversary.” . . .

Kristol continues - - -

Kornblut’s interpretation of what Palin said is either stupid or malicious.

Palin is evidently saying that American soldiers are going to Iraq to defend innocent Iraqis from al Qaeda in Iraq, a group that is related to al Qaeda, which did plan and carry out the Sept. 11 attacks.

It makes no sense for Kornblut to claim that Palin is arguing here that Saddam Hussein’s regime carried out 9/11—obviously Palin isn’t saying that our soldiers are now going over to Iraq to fight Saddam’s regime.

Palin isn’t linking Saddam to 9/11. She’s linking al Qaeda in Iraq to al Qaeda....

The rest of Kristol’s post is here.


Folks, are any of you surprised at what Kristol reports WaPo do any of you not know most in WaPo’s newsroom, in in the tank for Obama and Kornblut is about as objective a reporter as Matt Cooper, Joe Klein and Elizabeth Bumiller.

So who’s surprised Kronblut and WaPo’s editors teamed up on something like what Kristol notes?

Kornblut and many in WaPo “newsroom” are as deep in the tank for Sen. Obama as Andrew Sullivan, Maureen Dowd and former Chicago journalist David Axelrod.

You all may be interested to read the following from one of those Q&A with “our top reporters” MSM newspapers host at their Web sites. It’s from Sept. 3. The “questioner” prattles about “Palin's own relentless cuts of any program that might possibly provide the slightest help to unwed teenage mothers.”

That of course is false and was debunked on day one when the MSM “smear Palin” crowd put it out there.

But notice that Obama supporter Kornblut says nothing to correct the “questioner“ error.

Why do you think that is?

Is WaPo and Obama’s Kornblut, as Kristol asks, “either stupid or malicious?”

Here's the relevant part of WaPo’s Sept. 3 Q&A which it tells readers is meant to “inform them.”

Arlington, Va.: I have two questions. First, why are we not hearing more about the hypocrisy inherent in Gov. Palin's stance on her daughter's pregnancy juxtaposed against the Republicans' (and Palin's own) relentless cuts of any program that might possibly provide the slightest help to unwed teenage mothers? Second, what's your take on a potential vice-presidential debate? I hardly watch any broadcast TV, but if there is going to be a vice presidential debate I'll be glued to the set just to see what Joe Biden does to Palin. My sense is it won't be a pretty sight. The Trail: Palin Slashed Funding for Teen Moms (, Sept. 2)

Anne E. Kornblut: Good questions, both. I think the point you raise about Palin's approach to programs for teen funding is one we addressed in today's paper-- Paul Kane, my colleague, has a good story on it. I'll see if I can find the link.

Obviously that's the kind of policy issue that is now relevant, and on the table, in a way that she will have to answer.

And on the VP debate. You and me both. It'll be a real sight to behold.



Case Western Reserve School of Law Professor Jonathan Adler tells us what happened next in a post at Volokh Conspiracy: THE POST "GETS A REWRITE (BUT DOESN'T TELL ITS READERS)"

On Friday, the Washington Post ran this story about Gov. Sarah Palin's speech before a brigade of soldiers bound for Iraq -- at least, that link is to the story that is on the Post's web page.

But this is not the story as it originally appeared.

As Bill Kristol notes here, the second paragraph of the story was rewritten -- and an entire sentence replaced -- to fix a gross error that dramatically distorted what Palin had said.

Most egregiously, there is no indication on the web-version of the story that it was corrected, not even a note at the end of the piece.

Whatever one thinks of the Post's reporting here, it should at least acknowledge that it changed the story's text to fix an error.

If we bloggers are expected to disclose substantive revisions to our blog posts, shouldn't the MSM be held to the same standard?

(end of Adler's post)

JinC commenting again:

You read what WaPo did and you’ve got to wonder who those 20 or so percent of the population are who pollsters tell us have a lot of trust in MSM newspapers.

Maybe they’re the Democratic base.

Be sure to follow Adler’s link to Kristol’s post which Bill updated, laying out so clearly WaPo’s slight of hand cover-up for one of its Obama reporter-supporters.