The “liberal” NYTimes ties itself up into knots for Andrew Breitbart! (Why?)

NYTimes’ Correction Tries, Impossibly, to Help Breitbart Off Hook for Lying About Sherrod Video

Error-ridden puff-profile goes from shoddy to absolutely absurd…

While we wait for the New York Times to hopefully correct last week’s puff-profile on Rightwing scam-artist Andrew Breitbart, in regard to their demonstrably inaccurate statements about what occurred in his and James O’Keefe’s phony “pimp” hoax videos, I just noticed that the paper, which already corrected another point in the same piece, seems to be purposefully covering for Breitbart’s own original lie in their corrected text of the article.

At this point, they seem to be going out of their way to avoid calling Breitbart a liar, even if it means, impossibly, attempting to cover up for the very lie the paper states, he originally told them!

As we noted last week, the Times issued a correction to Jeremy W. Peters’ softball story, where he had originally reported that, in Breitbart’s selective clip from a speech by then USDA official Shirley Sherrod, audience members (according to Breitbart, but inexcusably never fact-checked by the paper before publication) “applauded” when she discussed her initial reticence in helping out a white farmer decades earlier.

In fact, as Media Matters first detailed on the day Peters’ NYTimes article was published — and as easily apparent to anybody who bothered to view the selective clip that Breitbart published at his websites under the inaccurate headline “NAACP Awards Racism” — the audience at the speech did not “applaud”.

In the course of correcting the inaccurate report, however, which had previously asserted that “Breitbart said…the crowd applauded,” the Times is now offering a completely different story about what Breitbart “said” — a story that differs with their own published correction on the very same page!

Be amazed. Here’s what the original June 26 version of the Peters’ NYT report stated [emphasis added]…

FULL STORY: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8601

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *