Author Topic: NYT caught altering Christie story: Port Authority official no longer 'has evidence,' it just 'exists'  (Read 253 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rangerrebew

  • America defending Veteran
  • TBR Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 65,681
  • “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them
NYT Caught Altering Christie Story: Port Authority Official No Longer 'Has Evidence,' It Just 'Exists'

By Tom Blumer

Created 02/01/2014 - 2:53pm


 
Longtime readers here may recall that yours truly and others have written about liberties New York Times reporter Kate Zernike has taken with the truth, especially in her reporting on the Tea Party movement. Her penchant for inventing baseless stories about alleged racism in the movement once caused the late Andrew Breitbart to label her "a despicable human being."

Breitbart might well have the same reaction to the hours-later revision made at Zernike's Times story Friday about Chris Christie. Several alert bloggers and tweeters noted that her story about Christie's knowledge of shut lanes on the George Washington Bridge conveniently went from solid to speculative without any indication that any changes had been made.



Here's how it originally appeared, as seen in the results of a Google search on [Christie "he has evidence"] (typed exactly as indicated between brackets) and the following tweet from Time Swampland blogger Michael Scherer (HT Twitchy):

ChristieTweetNYTalteration013114

Here are the current headline and first two paragraphs at Zernike's story:

NYTchangedStoryOnChristie013114

Kate Zernike is smart enough to know that there's a world of difference between "he has evidence" and "(apparently unpossessed and unseen) evidence exists." So why did she run with "he has evidence" for at least several hours? And why doesn't she and/or the Times have the integrity to tell us about the change?

The "correction" added sometime this morning appears to be unrelated to the nature of the "evidence."

Swampland's Scherer capsulized the likely motivation, but downplayed the significance of the change, and proceeded to misplace the blame:

SchererBlamesDrudgeForNYTmistake0114

"Clumsy"? How about "misleading, and likely deliberately so"?

Drudge didn't wrote the story, Michael. If Drudge made a mistake, perhaps it was in trusting anything originating with Kate Zernike in the first place.

Perhaps Zernike knew that a deliberately exaggerated story on a Friday afternoon might cause Drudge to bite, and would plant the impression in the minds of many that Christie has been caught dead to rights. Though he may ultimately be, the Times walkback indicates that it hasn't happened yet.

But Zernike and the Times have "successfully" made that impression widespread. Mission accomplished, I suppose — if your goal is to deceive and destroy regardless of merit.
Abraham Lincoln:

There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law.
--January 27, 1838 Lyceum Address

Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties. And not to Democrats alone do I make this appeal, but to all who love these
great and true principles.
--August 27, 1856 Speech at Kalamazoo, Michigan

Let us then turn this government back into the channel in which the framers of the Constitution originally placed it.
--July 10, 1858 Speech at Chicago


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf