A crazed Obama fan took a knife to the face of a 20-year-old McCain campaign worker in a politically motivated attack Wednesday.
In an incident which seems like it epitomizes much of the anger and bitterness of this election season, a McCain campaign worker from College Station, Texas who was in Pittsburgh helping to work a phone bank was robbed and then attacked, brutalized, and disfigured in what appears to be a politically motivated hate crime.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments76 - Jet
Dawn, I have nothing but respect for Dave, and my posts were NOT meant as such. Despite more than a few disagreements with him, I consider Dave Nalle one of the most knowledgable writer/editors on this site.
77 - pablo
Davey,
Letter written to Mr. Olson
78 - Jet
A suggestion Dave? Keep the title and the URL and rewrite about the hoax, and how a lot of people were overly eager to jump on the bandwagon before they realized there was no horse pulling it.
Your friend
Jet
79 - zingzing
or just add an update to the bottom of it. that would be the best thing.
80 - moon
An apology added to the bottom of it: For letting partisan prejudice trump common sense.
81 - Les Slater
Jet,
The post at the head of this thread should remain exactly as it was posted.
It would be good to have a different post reflecting on what transpired here.
It did happen. Do we cover it up? At most the post could put a link to the new topic.
Les
82 - moon
Les,
Not a bad plan. However, this site has chosen to cover up the capers of Nalle in the past, so a break with tradition would be needed.
83 - pablo
If he had written this article under OPINION I might now have such a problem with it. Nalle chose to jump the gun, which I find particularly offensive, since he has on numerous occasions accused me publicly on here of spreading hatred, (I only hate the ruling elite who are committing genocide in Iraq and robbing the US Treasury as we speak) and of being a fear monger, which I am not. He has called me on here in the past a Nazi, I happen to abhor National Socialism and fascism in particular.
Now he comes on here under the guise of News and spreads fear and hatred with this ridiculous article.
Jet I disagree with you vehemently on your characterization of Nalle as knowledgeable. He is at the very least a party hack (I am not an Obama supporter)and more than likely in my opinion a paid shill, as his families employer the CIA indicates.
I point to another article that he wrote on Jan 11, 2008 entitled Speedboat Diplomacy, again presented as news, not opinion, and his entire article has been discredited. Considering that we have been on the verge of a war with Iran for over a year, I consider that particular article extremely unprofessional and fear mongering.
Just my two sense worth bucko.
It is my opinion and I have said so in my letter to Olson that he either be political editor OR writer, not both, as he does a piss poor job of it.
84 - pablo
Here is a copy of the letter that I sent to Mr. Olson. Nalle, and Lisa Mckay cc.
I am a writer and prolific commenter in the Political section of your online magazine. I have written four articles and approximately 600 comments in the last year.
I write you today because I have several gripes to take up with you concerning the professionalism or lack thereof of Mr. Nalle, and also of being censored by Mr. Christopher Rose a comments editor for the political section of your online magazine.
Since I first started writing on your site, I felt that I was personally attacked numerous times by Mr. Nalle, instead of either debating me on the issues of the day or ignoring me.
I confess that some of my political beliefs are not easily accepted by many people on this site. That being said, I am not a racist, a nazi (I have been called that by Nalle in public on your site), nor a hate monger of any sort.
I just happen to not believe in the official government conspiracy theory regarding 9/11, and also happen to believe that there is an international cabal of bankers through JP Morgan and the CFR, and the Royal Institute of International relations to establish a global police state. I am not the only one to make this claim, indeed Professor Carrol Quigley, (Bill Clinton's self professed political mentor in fact wrote a whole book about it over 1200 pages long entitled Tragedy and Hope.
I was approached by Mr. Nalle to write an article on my 9/11 conspiracy theories, which I in fact did. Soon thereafter I received a letter from Lisa McKay, saying that my article was rejected as the editorial board had decided not to publish 9/11 articles that were at variance with the official conspiracy theory. Needless to say I was somewhat taken aback as Mr. Nalle hiimself the political editor had suggested that I do.
A few months later I wrote another article on why I thought that Al Qaeda was a myth, which according to Robin Cooke former British Foreign Secretary also said was a myth. A recent BBC documentary entitled "The Power of Nightmares" also made the same claim, that in fact Al Qaeda was created by the FBI to indict Bin Laden under the RICO statutes.
This article was under the label OPINION, as was the 9/11 article. Yesterday Mr. Nalle published an article under the label NEWS that asserted quite hysterically I might add that a certain woman had been attacked at at ATM machine and had Obamas initial carved into his face. He presented it as news and as fact, before the story had even settled. I find this particularly in relation to my articles being rejected as OPINION as very hypocritical and unprofessional. This story was completely debunked in all the MSM today, yet Dave chose to write it as fact before any of the dust had settled.
I have been called by Mr. Nalle a nazi, a tinfoil hat paranoid fear mongering writer on numerous occasions. I can take the heat, however I do not like hypocrisy, particularly when it is directed my way by the editor of your politics section.
A few days ago I had several instances of my commenting deleted by Mr. Rose for using the offensive word BUBBA. Now I can be called any name under the book by Nalle, yet I use the word Bubba and it is censored. Mr. Rose replied that Nalle frequently has his remarks censored. I did a google search on it and found very very few instances of this, and none of the deragatory remarks he sent my way censored.
The reason that I am writing to you as opposed to Lisa Mckay, is that I asked her several times after she told me that 9/11 articles that were contrary to the official version were verboten, if she could please tell me any other subjects that were forbidden, she declined to mention any to me.
I wrote you several months ago about my attending over 700 Grateful Dead concerst for over 30 years and approached you about writing about some of my unique experiences followig this amazing band, Your wrote back and encouraged me to do so. However I have decided months ago not to write any more articles on this site for the time being as two of them had been declined, in my opinion for no other reason that either Nalle or Mckay did not like the subject matter.
As you can see from this letter sir, I am more than capable of writing a succinct, easy to understand, and my vocabulary and spelling are fine for the most part.
I do not like being censored particularly for using the word bubba, nor do I like being told to write an article by the political editor of your magazine then being told that it is forbidden by a higher up. I find this very unprofessional and I was quite unhappy about it.
Incidentally Nalle on an almost daily basis uses personal attack with deragatory remarks towards those that disagree with him, thus I frequently refer to him as bubba or bucko.
I suggest that Mr. Nalle either be a writer/commenter OR political editor but not both as he does a lousy job at it, and his obvious conflicts of interest are overwhelming. I also think that Mr. Nalle should refrain from his personal attacks as long as he is the political editor of this site, as it is not only very unbecoming of him, but in my opinion highly unprofessional.
Sincerely
Pablo
85 - troll
...the Palins should take this poor girl under their family wing and assist in her rehabilitation
(btw - Les is correct of course)
86 - Dr Dreadful
Pablo, I don't see anything particularly objectionable in the way Dave presented the article. If you re-read the piece carefully, you'll see that he didn't suggest (although he did in the subsequent comments thread) that this was in any way typical behavior of Obama supporters and/or Democrats.
As I understand it, Dave came across this story last night, noticed that it hadn't yet been picked up by any of the major news networks, and was eager to get a scoop for the site.
I don't see anything in the piece other than a laying-out of the facts of the case as they appeared at the time.
The comments space is intended for challenges and responses, which is exactly what happened. In my view, Dave can quite justifiably be taken to task for some of his remarks in the comments, but not for the article itself.
87 - moon
Pablo,
Nalle routinely personally attacks anyone who disagrees with him.
He hasn't a whit of the sense of balance that is required in an editor.
He has cloned himself when backed into a corner to provide facts that support his frequently bizarre claims about the world we live in, and used the clones' comments as support for him.
When confronted about his behavior--as in the case of my complaints about his personal attacks against me, which began approximately 30 minutes after I first posted an opinion contrary to his in September of 2006--he has denied it, even though the attacks are right there in the archives.
Perhaps the case is simply this: That nobody with any professional editing skills is willing to work for Blogcritics for free?
Or maybe he knows where a body is buried?
88 - pablo
Sorry Dread but I take issue with your comment.
He was in fact spreading hysteria and hatred. He jumped the gun, and as there is not to my knowledge anyone who screens his articles before he writes them, highly unprofessional. Indeed I hold him to a higher account due to that fact, as I laid out in my letter to Eric.
My main beef with him are his personal attacks, as Moon so eloquently states above. I find him hypocritical to the extreme, particularly when he has falsely accused me in the past of spreading hatred and fear, not to mention openly calling me a nazi, and not even having the decency to apologize to me for it.
It is my opinion that he does this site great disservice by remaining the political editor when he is so openly biased, and uses personal attacks as his modus operandi on a constant basis.
I will wait for an answer from Mr. Olson, in particular about being censored for using bubba, before I decide whether or not to continue commenting on this site. Bubba to me does not mean a racist, or a nazi, but it does convey what I want it to, which is that bubbas are good ole boys, that for the most part are ignorant, frequently from the south, and usually full of it.
How Nalle can openly call me a nazi and not be cenosred, yet I use the term bubba and can is absurd, and I am sure that you know that Dread. Bubba conveys exactly what I want, and it is extremely apt in my assessment of Nalle and company, which includes his sidekick Clavos.
As I have stated on here recently when censored for using that terrible word bubba, I planned on writing Olson anyways, the hate mongering article above only adds fire to my flame. It speaks for itself about Nalle and his unprofessional agenda on this site.
89 - Les Slater
My concern is not so much with Dave. It is the suggestion at 15:45 EDT, AFTER the hoax was thoroughly discredited, that the original post 'looks really bad at this point', and that the 'body' of the post be edited to reflect that it was a hoax.
For better or worse, this thread, with the original topic post, did happen. It is a valuable lesson that should not be blurred because it reflects badly on BC.
90 - Dawn
Hey Moon, how about you quit while you are ahead? Seriously, because your knowledge of the inner workings of BC is beyond limited, perhaps bordering on ignorantly misinformed and dare I say, more than stupid.
Also, Pablo, it's OLSEN with an E. Eric rarely pays any attention to anyone with the temerity to spell his name incorrectly. Repeatedly.
As for Dave Nalle's editing skills and such, they are more than adequate and while I may disagree with virtually every political thought he's ever conjured, those of you attacking him are no better.
Political hatred from either side is not only counter-productive, but ugly.
The story was a hoax, but Dave had no way of knowing that. He, like anyone else who jumps on a breaking story and later finds out it's a hoax, need simply update it reflecting that. There's really no need to get all indignant and gloaty. It could have happened to ANYONE.
Sheesh, I hate being put in a position to defend a Republican, but let's have some common decency.
91 - Clavos
Sheesh, I hate being put in a position to defend a Republican...
Nonetheless, to your credit, you do a nice job of it.
92 - pablo
Dawn,
You come across as a shrew dear. My beef with Nalle has NOTHING to do with his politics nor mine. My beef with him has to do with his conflicting interests as political editor and commenter, as well as his frequent personal attacks with those that disagree with him.
Instead of discussing the issues of my disagreement, you Dawn reduce it to a typo on Mr. Olsen's name. You come across as more hostile than anyone on this thread me included dear.
I dont hate Nalle, nor am I spreading hatred, I don't like hypocrisy particularly when it is sent my way. Both this article and the one that I referenced Speedboat Diplomacy speak for themselves, they were presented as NEWS and were written for no other reason than to spread hatred towards Iran and in this article towards Democrats, of which I am not one.
Should Mr. Olsen decide not to address my concerns because of typos of his name, so be it. I doubt that he will however.
If you know so much about the inner workings of this blogsite why don't you address some of the issues that I brought up, such as me being censored for using bubba, while Nalle can openly call me a nazi dear, huh? Or why don't you address the fact that my articles had been rejected, while Davey boy is free to publish the above trash. huh?
93 - moon
Dawn,
Methinks you protest WAAAAAY too much. Your defense of Nalle is way over the top.
And your PERSONAL ATTACK on me--calling me IGNORANT and STUPID--betray your belief that you are above having to follow the rules of conduct on this site.
Moreover, your claim that this "mistake" could have happened to anyone is completely bogus, as I have checked at least 20 sites that carried the story and this site is the only one where an obvious OPINION PIECE claiming that a CRAZED Obama supporter assaulted the woman and reflected who were the kind of people who support Obama was passed off as NEWS.
NO ONE ELSE said anything close to that. In fact, most folks who wrote about the incident were cautious and guarded in their OPINIONS and LANGUAGE.
I will call things exactly the way I see them, as always.
If that means you are caught with your pants down, please remember that you chose to drop them and squat; I did not pull them down for you.
94 - pablo
I am starting to like you Moon. :) :)
95 - Barry
Well, the girl has recanted the entire story - said she made the whole thing up. What now, Dave? Hmmm?
96 - alex
mmm....looks kinda fishy. thats just my first impression, i guess i could be wrong
97 - moon
Dave continues not to show his face on this thread, although he DID post on another thread after the hoax was outed and it was mentioned on that other thread.
Which means he can't use the excuse that he was in the can all day and didn't know that the shit had hit the fan in another venue as well.
However, I've got plenty of catching up to do in other places myself (and not in the can, either), so willnot hang around to see how this comes out.
Yes, pun intended.
98 - Lisa Solod Warren
Dear Dawn,
Perhaps I can put this in some perspsective?
Dave "broke" a news story that was already old news.
He then has not appeared to talk about the outcome of that "news" story since it has been debunked.
Why not?
He should have.
At the least, as a blogcritics editor, he should have written a piece about how the girl recanted. He should have updated the piece and then written an apology as both the writer of the piece AND as a bc editor.
And, in the future, he should watch his own comments....very very carefully, when commenting on such a sensitive piece that I, as a seasoned journalist, IMMEDIATELY realized was hinky, and would not have published anywhere, including a blogger site, without sitting on it, and trying to verify it. And as soon as I knew it was a hoax, as the writer/editor of the piece I would have written a fulsome apology and explanation.
I think you are great, Dawn, but I have to agree that your defense of Dave in this case makes little sense.
WHY have we not heard from him? Why have others posted the story of the girl's recanting her story?
I was gone all day or I would have done the same but the moment I came home I logged on. And you will notice that immediately upon my reading Dave's story I mention Susan Smith: THAT is how spurious the story sounded to be right off.
We really, all of us, need to be really careful what we label as NEWS and what as OPINION.
Dave's piece could easily have made reference to the girl's story and then gone off as an opinion story IF he believed it to be true. The fact that he ran with the story based on ONE source and labeled it news was troublesome for this writer... and more troublesome is the fact that he has not come back to write an explanation and apology but has allowed you to defend him.
It makes Blogcritics look very less than credible.
ALL other news networks have reported the real story.
99 - Cannonshop
#97 ...Or why don't you address the fact that my articles had been rejected, while Davey boy is free to publish the above trash. huh?
So...it's Envy. You're pissed because Nalle gets published and you don't.
Suggestion for yas: Why not Ask the publisher why you were rejected? I know it doesn't support your feelings of victimization and unfairness, but if you want an article published to a magazine (ANY Magazine) and you've been unsuccessful in the past getting something published in that magazine, there's probably a reason, and it's usually the Writer, not the Editor or Publisher, who's got a problem.
I've Been Paid for writing before, as a freelancer, and getting in requires work. Blogcritics has pre-acceptance standards, Pablo, you can't just haul off a rant as a new guy (or even frequent visiting fan) with no prior experience and expect them to welcome you with open arms and no references. Hate to tell you this, but even you aren't that wonderful.
You either earn your spot by knocking their socks off, or you earn it by showing quality work somewhere else. A blog of your own, or some published articles elsewhere, maybe a book...something. I note you don't include a URL when you post. Most Bloggers are horribly vain, the lack of URL indicates to myself you don't have a blog or site or anything that might be used as an example of work you've done on your own before.
If you think you're as good as Nalle, then you need to be able to back your claim. From what I've seen in the last four or five months (since I started coming to the site regularly), you haven't done that, certainly posting to the comments section isn't proof-comment threads are like Fan-forums, it isn't the same as Quality, much less superior, writing.
Nalle blew it on this article, but there are a LOT of good writers who blew it on this issue all over the internet, including some respected and respectable names outside of Blogcritics.
100 - zingzing
well, it's not like dave HAS to be the one to write up the story (about the hoax).
he SHOULD, but he doesn't have to.
101 - Lisa Solod Warren
Actually, he really should. As the editor and the writer, he really really should. He certainly should not just.....disappear.
102 - Bennett
Methinks Dave has a financial interest in BC. Someone was cash strapped and Dave sold some stock. It's all so simple, and common.
No web site with a smidgen of integrity would put up with the vox popoli stunt and allow Dave to remain an Editor.
103 - Cannonshop
He might be busy, too- doesn't Dave have a day job or something? (hell, I'd miss even MORE than I already do if we weren't on strike right now...)
104 - Dan(Miller)
This story has generated lots of heat, but very little light. It was all over the news earlier today and Dave Nalle did not vouch for its veracity. He stated that the "provenance [of the photo] is unknown." He stated it "seems like [the incident]. . . .epitomizes much of the anger and bitterness of this election season" (emphasis added). The attacker "reportedly shouted. . . ." and so on.
Anyone lacking prescience who attempts to relate breaking news is in danger of having the "news story" turn out to be a story rather than news. Should Dave have noted in a subsequent comment that the "news" turned out to be a hoax when that happened? Yes, he should have.
Dave Nalle did not manufacture this news story; he reported it. I have seen far less anger directed at others who use their positions as reporters to make rather than to report the news. And finding a retraction is very difficult; if and when if ever it comes, it tends to be rather defensive and half-hearted. This is one example. There are others.
The ad hominem comments with which this thread and others have been infested are very disheartening. Civility seems to have become a thing fondly to be remembered, but to be rejected in practice. In that connection, it is my understanding that the politics editors, Dave Nalle among them, do not have the capability of editing or deleting comments; they once did, but that apparently changed quite some time ago. That is the job of the comments editors, and they seem to do a fairly workmanlike job of it.
There are more interesting things to discuss on BC than feeling of personal insult, irritation at other people's comments, and whether it is suitable to use demeaning nicknames for them. There is probably a difficult line to draw between fair comment and personal attacks. To me, some of the recent comments seem to have crossed the line. I would urge fewer outbursts of indignant self importance and a bit more well directed humor.
Dan(Miller)
105 - El Bicho
The problem is Dave the commentor does a huge disservice to the credibility of Dave the editor/writer, so this revolt certainly isn't surprising.
The article was fine last night, although the last paragraph had some questionable parts. It's the comments here and elsewhere that create the appearance of an agenda and why people gleefully want to knock him down a few pegs.
He needs to show up and take his medicine
106 - pablo
For your information Canon, I have had 4 articles published here. The reasons my submissions were not published has to do with not aligning with either the left or the right on here, ie my aricle on the myth of alqaeda and my 9/11 piece, both of which were written under the heading of OPINION.
I again would like to point out the Speedboat Diplomacy article written by Nalle as NEWS, yet this story has been completely debunked months ago, actually within a week of it being written, yet Dave did not retract, but just ignored it. That is highly unprofessional and for that reason alone he should not be the editor here.
Again my main point of contention with Nalle is not this article per se, but his attacks on those that disagree with him, which I get censored for saying bubba, yet he is let off scott free for calling me a nazi, which he in fact did.
I personally have nothing against personal attacks as long as the playing field is level which it aint.
I have spent a good portion of my life combating facsism in all of its myriad forms, so to be called a nazi by Nalle was a bit over the top.
No one seems to be interested in the double standards here, other than me and Moon.
107 - El Bicho
Dan, if you think you are helping Dave out, think again.
"Dave Nalle did not vouch for its veracity."
Dave the writer may not have but Dave the author did: "I am not going to question her story at this point. She lives not far from here and she's an aggie and aggies are too dumb to lie."
"it is my understanding that the politics editors, Dave Nalle among them, do not have the capability of editing or deleting comments; they once did, but that apparently changed quite some time ago."
Your understanding is flat-out wrong. He may have been told not to after the extremely embarrassing "Vox Populi" incident, but the editors still have the capability.
108 - AlanE
The word "allegedly" is evidently not in Dave's vocabulary.
109 - Cannonshop
Back on the actual topic for a moment...
There's one thing Dave got right-this election year has everyone on both sides wound up to the edge of breaking, and that kind of environment, hate to say it, is what breeds this kind of hoax, and creates (in the mind of the hoaxer) the idea, and a ready-made excuse that entices the kind of people who make these kinds of hoaxes.
I'm not going to say it's sad, because for it to be sad, I'd have to have some sympathy for the hoaxer.
I don't. If she wants to play these games, she's in the wrong party. I do not foresee or expect a horde of Republican Ops coming out of the woodwork to defend or justify her actions-that's not what being Conservative's about to me, or the Conservatives I personally know.
Miss Todd needs to sit down and decide what she really believes in, and take her lumps like a grown-up.
I don't actually expect she will, mind, but she should.
110 - Clavos
Your understanding is flat-out wrong. He may have been told not to after the extremely embarrassing "Vox Populi" incident, but the editors still have the capability.
When's the last time you went into a comment to edit it?
I can't edit comments. That's a fact; mt won't let me. I believe CR said a long time ago that that ability was restricted to him and Doc.
111 - Dan(Miller)
El Bicho,
You complain that Dave Nalle said, "I am not going to question her story at this point. She lives not far from here and she's an aggie and aggies are too dumb to lie."(emphasis added) Perhaps we read things a bit differently. That hardly seems to me to be a ringing endorsement of the young lady's story.
I have only been commenting on and submitting articles to BC since April of this year. I have no personal knowledge of what may have happened prior to that. As to whether politics editors, as distinguished from comments editors, have editorial powers over comments, I have been told that such powers were retracted quite some time ago. I assume that you must have some reason to believe that Dave Nalle has exercised comment editor privileges subsequent to the embarrassing "Vox Populi" incident or perhaps recently. If so, perhaps you will be kind enough to share your information with the rest of us.
Dan(Miller)
112 - El Bicho
I did it to my own comment (#111) before I responded. Removed the last period in the comment and I have no access to Chris or the Doc's login.
113 - NoWay
Shame. So quick to assume the story was true... shows desperation. Such a lost cause, this cycle is. The underlying racism in this whole episode is shameful a Republican party that should know better.
114 - Clavos
But you can't modify PUBLISHED comments, right? That's what Dan(Miller) is referring to.
115 - Dan(Miller)
Re Comments # 110,113,116,117 and 118: Perhaps CR or Doc would like to chime in here. Someone seems to be misinformed, and an authoritative resolution would be appreciated.
Then, perhaps we can get back to the critical question of whether Dave Nalle should be hung, drawn and quartered or merely be required to sit in the public square and have rotten tomatoes thrown at him.
Dan(Miller)
116 - Dr Dreadful
Just to clarify, the login and password to edit comments is different than the one to edit articles. Chris and myself are not the only ones who have that password: the site owners/administrators will, very very occasionally, go in to edit a comment if neither Chris nor I are around.
117 - El Bicho
I know lawyers like to twist their questions around as they go to get to the conclusions they want, or maybe you aren't understanding the words, but I was only responding to your comments as written, not the new meaning you have chosen for them.
Veracity somehow changed to ringing endorsement. There was no comment from anyone about a ringing endorsement, but Dave did say she was too dumb to lie. If she can't lie, that goes to the veracity of the statements she made. I will grant that you may well read Dave's words differently although it escapes me how.
"I assume that you must have some reason to believe that Dave Nalle has exercised comment editor privileges subsequent"
Don't know why you would assume that since I never claimed Dave has done it since. I was responding to your previous claim that "the politics editors, Dave Nalle among them, do not have the capability of editing or deleting comments." If someone higher up the chain wants to explain the situation, I will concede the point that politics editors have different restrictions than other editors.
118 - El Bicho
I understood what Dan meant. I can modify PUBLISHED comments and did. Never have tried before today. But if the politics editors can't I'll stand corrected.
119 - Dr Dreadful
Dan @ #110:
It's rather ironic that you should link to a story on Newsbusters as an illustration of your argument, because they were one of the few news sources to give Ms Todd's story much credence when it first broke, and are now doing a very creditable Tasmanian Devil impression as they try desperately to spin it in a way that makes Todd come out still smelling of at least some sort of hothouse flower.
Here's their take on it all. Continue on past the article to the comments, some of which are by the author.
120 - Dave Nalle
I've been out all day buying meat and shotgun shells for the local Turkey Shoot (both McCain and Obama supporters are welcome to attend), so I couldn't reply or write a followup article.
For the record this article was written within minutes of this story being picked up as a news item by the AP, Reuters, CNN, Fox and other news outlets. I got to the story before most of them did, based off of news reports on the Pittsburgh TV stations.
If anything, my report contains more qualifications and is more thorough in presenting the ambiguities of the case than most of the other news coverage was. Plus I make very clear in my first comment that I had serious questions about the report, and that was many hours before Ashley Todd recanted.
I do have a followup article which is going to be in pending in a few minutes, and I thank the omnipresent Matt Sussman for posting his satirical followup earlier today.
Dave
121 - Dan(Miller)
El Bicho,
In view of Comment #122, I see no point in belaboring further who has what privileges to edit posted comments, when it was changed or why.
Therefore, I will only suggest that to certify someone's veracity is, to me, rather a ringing endorsement. Veracity is, in a perhaps old fashioned way, important. Often, since Truth is such a valuable thing, it is economized more than it should be.
Dan(Miller)
122 - Dave Nalle
Just for the record, I'm not adding an apology for a report written based on reports from major media outlets which they were reporting in much the same way. The fact that this was a hoax is well established now, but it was still news at the time it was reported and the article remains an object lesson on what can happen when you report a breaking story that is still in progress.
There is nothing partisan in the story. Every single statement made was drawn directly from a news source (three are cited in the article contrary to what some have claimed) and there is not one bit of opinion expressed in the article. In fact, structurally it's a model of what a blog news article ought to be.
But yes, it's still all wrong. But the reporter does not control the story, he just reports it. It's not his fault if the story he reported at midnight turns out not to be complete the next afternoon.
Dave
123 - Dan(Miller)
Doc, re Comment #123
I wasn't citing Newsbusters as a uniformly authoritative source of news. I haven't found any of those. I was citing it about the CNN interview of Governor Palin. As the article indicates, the interviewer has now (sort of, in a backhanded way) apologized for not being clear. I don't think there is any real dispute that the CNN interviewer attributed to the National Review article something quite different from that intended, and clearly stated, by the author of that article. It appears to have been a "gotcha" moment, and it (unlike others in the past) backfired.
Dan(Miller)
124 - Lisa Solod Warren
Hey Dave? ever been a real reporter? How about "claims" she was attacked. How about using the words allegedly, reportedly? How about station so and so reported that a young girl claimed...... and so on.
Your first paragraph was as incendiary as the purported (another good word) crime.
Sorry, Dave. I don't buy your defense. OR the fact that, once you heard the retraction (hours ago) you didn't try and get back to comment.
And I DON'T buy another politics editor NOT vetting the story (where were you, Clav), too. Other than Dave. Didn't you run it by another editor?
That would make the most sense. When an editor writes a story, it makes sense to pass it by another editor who would, it would seem, say: Hey, I think we need some fudge words, like allegedly etc. in here, Dave. Whereupon Dave would, like a real reporter, say, Sure, and work on rewriting the piece.
C'mon, guys.
125 - Lisa Solod Warren
I mean, Dave: Look at your head and subhead. There is NO room for doubt there. If that was all people read.....
You can't wiggle out of this one, I am afraid.