Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Washington Post: "Just because something has appeared in a newspaper does not mean that is entirely accurate"   (washingtonpost.com) divider line
48
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

4630 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Mar 2008 at 10:03 PM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



48 Comments     (+0 »)
 
nashBridges
2008-03-28 6:42:07 PM  
Well, duh!

One of my neighbors was kidnapped a few years ago and a reporter for our local paper asked me how I felt about it. I said: "I don't consider this a plus for the neighborhood" and they printed: A neighbor, Jim Doe, said he was "nonplussed".
 
nashBridges
2008-03-28 6:43:27 PM  
WTF??!!

"Too many nested strong/b tags, removing extra."

I've never seen THAT before. Ignore the extra bold.
 
madmann
2008-03-28 7:22:10 PM  
What????

Washington Post.... your newsletter, I wish to subscribe to it.

/No, I don't.
 
SkinnyHead
2008-03-28 7:27:49 PM  
How these factoids got into the Post story is unclear, but they offer a somewhat misleading picture...

No, it's very clear. The Bosnia story was written back in the day when the press was still stupid in love with Hillary. Now that that's over and they got themselves a new lover, they can look back and laugh at their love letters to Hillary.
 
Kublai Khan
2008-03-28 7:37:34 PM  
Just because something has appeared in a newspaper does not mean that is entirely accurate

But since the above statement appeared in a newspaper too, does that mean we get the Liar Paradox?
 
strangeguitar
2008-03-28 8:06:02 PM  
But Bat Boy is still real, right?
Right?
 
Snarfangel
2008-03-28 8:49:01 PM  
Kublai Khan: Just because something has appeared in a newspaper does not mean that is entirely accurate

But since the above statement appeared in a newspaper too, does that mean we get the Liar Paradox?

Here's the Venn diagram:
[image from upload.wikimedia.org too old to be available]
A is the set of entirely true things. B is the set of things that appear in the newspaper.*

*overlap enlarged for clarity.
 
D'Annunzio
2008-03-28 10:06:31 PM  
strangeguitar: But Bat Boy is still real, right?
Right?

Weekly World News only reports the facts. Stories like those have got to be true.
 
Gyrfalcon [TotalFark]
2008-03-28 10:11:01 PM  
D'Annunzio: strangeguitar: But Bat Boy is still real, right?
Right?

Weekly World News only reports the facts. Stories like those have got to be true.

I miss WWN. They had some great cover photos, like the one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse exercising their horses in the desert outside Phoenix.
 
JonnyBGoode
2008-03-28 10:13:56 PM  
"Just because something has appeared in a newspaper does not mean that is entirely accurate"

img252.imageshack.usView Full Size
 
CaesarSneezy
2008-03-28 10:15:25 PM  
I can't find a picture of the red/blue door guards in Labyrinth. You know what I mean.
 
minoridiot
2008-03-28 10:19:52 PM  
My dad did some work for the government in the 60's. At that time they told him that he should believe on 50% of what he read in the newspapers and 10% of what he heard on the news. I don't things have changed all that much since then.
 
libbyshome
2008-03-28 10:22:11 PM  
Just Becase You Can, Doesn't Mean You Should
Just because it's digital, doesn't mean it sounds good
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
Just Because You're Hearing Doesn't Mean You're Listening

etc
 
Nemo's Brother
2008-03-28 10:22:35 PM  
With modern media, it isn't always what they said, but what they didn't say. The careful omission of facts or the clever position of words can be technically true, but completely mislead or misrepresent what is really going on.

This is what the modern media thrives on.
 
Nemo's Brother
2008-03-28 10:23:21 PM  
Snarfangel:

*overlap enlarged for clarity.
I was going to say. You're being a little optimistic there with your graph.
 
FatherDale
2008-03-28 10:23:35 PM  
Gyrfalcon: D'Annunzio: strangeguitar: But Bat Boy is still real, right?
Right?

Weekly World News only reports the facts. Stories like those have got to be true.

I miss WWN. They had some great cover photos, like the one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse exercising their horses in the desert outside Phoenix.

I liked the one about the Moon being the head of a giant space monster.
 
itsfullofstars
2008-03-28 10:24:46 PM  
Remember when journalism was a respected career. Good times, good times.
 
libbyshome
2008-03-28 10:29:09 PM  
agelessmarketing.typepad.comView Full Size


The most trusted man in America
 
Jacobin
2008-03-28 10:29:52 PM  
like all those WMDs the WaPo was pushing before IraqNam?
 
Dellirium
2008-03-28 10:29:54 PM  
itsfullofstars: Remember when journalism was a respected career. Good times, good times.

The last time that was a reality was 25 years ago and I was working with people like Walter Cronkite.

All gone to hell in a marketing basket since then.

There are a few rare exceptions still out there...
 
Dellirium
2008-03-28 10:31:16 PM  
libbyshome:

You beat me by a minute.

MacNeil and Lehrer are still honest. The rest...not so much.
 
Hooked_on_Fark
2008-03-28 10:32:05 PM  
nashBridges and they printed: A neighbor, Jim Doe, said he was "nonplussed".

I'd bet that the reporter has a degree in "communications".
 
HowlingFrog
2008-03-28 10:34:30 PM  
Nemo's Brother: With modern media, it isn't always what they said, but what they didn't say. The careful omission of facts or the clever position of words can be technically true, but completely mislead or misrepresent what is really going on.

I believe this is generally defined as "propaganda".
 
HowlingFrog
2008-03-28 10:36:12 PM  
libbyshome: The most trusted man in America

As somebody who grew up with Cronkite's reporting, I tend to agree.
 
TheMouse
2008-03-28 10:38:00 PM  
"Just because something has appeared in a newspaper does not mean that is entirely accurate"

But if it's on the Interweb it MUST be true"
 
aerojockey [TotalFark]
2008-03-28 10:38:02 PM  
No way, the Washington Post would embellish

/yes, the media really was liberal back then
//not so much today
 
aerojockey [TotalFark]
2008-03-28 10:38:39 PM  
...a story about the wonderful Clintons in 1996?
 
TMBGfreak
2008-03-28 10:41:26 PM  
Snarfangel: Kublai Khan: Just because something has appeared in a newspaper does not mean that is entirely accurate

But since the above statement appeared in a newspaper too, does that mean we get the Liar Paradox?

Here's the Venn diagram:

A is the set of entirely true things. B is the set of things that appear in the newspaper.*

*overlap enlarged for clarity.

img408.imageshack.usView Full Size
 
Moses To Sandy Koufax
2008-03-28 10:41:40 PM  
ONE PINOCCHIO: Some shading of the facts. TWO PINOCCHIOS: Significant omissions or exaggerations. THREE PINOCCHIOS: Significant factual errors. FOUR PINOCCHIOS: Real whoppers. THE GEPPETTO CHECK MARK: Statements and claims contain the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
/ Facepalm
 
i hate jimmy page
2008-03-28 10:46:26 PM  
img241.imageshack.usView Full Size


This headline hurts my head.
 
libbyshome
2008-03-28 10:49:20 PM  
periodistadigital.comView Full Size
 
FrancoFile [TotalFark]
2008-03-28 10:57:50 PM  
libbyshome: So which one of those is Ric Romero?
 
libbyshome
2008-03-28 11:04:58 PM  
FrancoFile: libbyshome: So which one of those is Ric Romero?

Neither.
Woodward & Bernstein = Watergate
 
Vman
2008-03-28 11:04:58 PM  
I don't believe their story
 
libbyshome
2008-03-28 11:07:50 PM  
Funny similpost.
 
Vman
2008-03-28 11:08:19 PM  
It is really the publics' fault, the cattle eat more entertainews and tend to snore through real nonbiased reporting both in print and spoken.
 
Vman
2008-03-28 11:09:21 PM  
OH wow my first simulpost... what do I win BIE? a Cookie? A month of TF? oh wait I have it right here THE INTERNET!
 
GunshipPolitico
2008-03-28 11:28:58 PM  
When my mom was on fark, the librarian who protested a book having the word scrotum in it,(check my profile for a link) she was totally misrepresented. She was pretty angry with that, and only now is she getting back the courage to speak her mind on things.
 
LOGICAL_PSYCHO
2008-03-29 12:07:23 AM  
GunshipPolitico: When my mom was on fark, the librarian who protested a book having the word scrotum in it,(check my profile for a link) she was totally misrepresented. She was pretty angry with that, and only now is she getting back the courage to speak her mind on things.

Tell her for me .......... don't bother.
 
eff ewe
2008-03-29 12:15:00 AM  
Captain Obvious says...

lib.ndsu.nodak.eduView Full Size
 
Ball of Confusion
2008-03-29 12:37:27 AM  
It would certainly help if today's "journalists" could manage to coerce a thought into a complete sentence. I swear half the farked-up headlines here on this site are written by TribCo employees.


For a group of people whose stock in trade is words, you'd think they'd be better at crafting something out of them...


Oh, and, it is better to be first than to be accurate. You can always print a retraction/correction later...
 
Ramonesfan1214
2008-03-29 12:41:09 AM  
[image from thewavemag.com too old to be available]

agrees

/janet cooke
//WaPost reporter from the 80's
///too lazy to say the rest, read her story on wiki
 
Superjoe
2008-03-29 12:46:50 AM  
Am I really supposed to believe that a first lady would got to a potential war zone? I don't care if we're talking about Hillary or Eleanor Roosevelt, no first lady is going to be put into serious danger just for some political stunt. And if they ever were, I'd question the sanity of those responsible.
 
BuzzBoy
2008-03-29 2:48:20 AM  
"like all those WMDs the WaPo was pushing before IraqNam"

What a coincidence, I just watched a PBS FRONTLINE earlier this evening about "Bush's War". The White House was building a case for invading Iraq so they leaked faulty WMD intel to the news media.
The NY Times & Washington Post printed articles based on the faulty intel. The White House, in the form of Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice went on a media blitz on the Sunday morning news talk shows to advance their cause. They all quoted their own leaks and said,..."it's even in the NY Times and Washington Post so it must be true" !
 
Isildur
2008-03-29 2:54:07 AM  
I love how they have the gall to be snarky about their own mistake.

"She believed our shiatty reporting! OMG look how dishonest she is!"
 
TxRabbit
2008-03-29 3:12:18 AM  
At least everything you see and hear on television is true though.
 
cabal08
2008-03-29 3:53:35 AM  
SkinnyHead
No, it's very clear. The Bosnia story was written back in the day when the press was still stupid in love with Hillary. Now that that's over and they got themselves a new lover, they can look back and laugh at their love letters to Hillary.

EXACTLY!

You nailed it four posts in.

The reason why the wheels are falling off the "Clinton Machine" is because the press is no longer giving them cover. They're the same as they ever were, ruthless lying dirtbags only now the media has a new love and has kicked them to the curb.
 
jake3988 [OhFark]
2008-03-29 1:08:14 PM  
See... this is why I LOOOOOOOVE blogs and hate newspapers.

Seriously. Blogs cite 8000 sources in every article. Do newspapers cite their sources? Nope.
 
Displayed 48 of 48 comments


Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

Can't get enough Fark in your life? Try

TotalFark

More threads. More community. More Farking.

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.