fresh air over at YARGB
gets credit for posting this
significant observation:

“But one thing about the AP that makes it particularly hard to manage
that no one ever talks about:

Most reporters can file their stories directly onto the wire. There is virtually no editing or fact-checking on breaking news.”
-fresh air

is it possible for you
to do a dedicated post on that topic??

the competition between news-wires
and the blog-o-sphere
would seem to suggest that’s
a fairly critical parallel:

no editors.
no “fact checkers”.

i smell a story.

some of us checked up on it a while ago.
take your time,markus.
we’ll wait.

_________________

Tara quotes from Drudge:

the AP sloppiness of reporting
is a LOT like the “running our ports” vs.
“managing a freight terminal”
public dis-service in news reporting:

AP FRIDAY NIGHT CLARIFICATION ON BUSH/KATRINA VIDEO
Fri Mar 03 2006 19:48:29 ET

Clarification: Katrina-Video story
ASSOCIATED PRESS

“The Army Corps of Engineers considers a breach a hole developing in a levee rather than an overrun. The story should have made clear that Bush was warned about floodwaters overrunning the levees, rather than the levees breaking.

The day before the storm hit, Bush was told there were grave concerns that the levees could be overrun.”

the more accurate term is “over-topped”
and it creates a clear mental image.

even in their correction,
“over-run” has implications of “collapse”.

these people are hacks,not wordsmiths.

After all the relevant departments in the Bush Administration approved the Dubai ports deal, Bush was informed before the news became public. And then Bush cancelled the deal, forcing Dubai to either spin off the US ports, or to cancel the whole purchase of the British firm.

I think we all know that the Clintons (indeed, most Dems) would be screaming about Bush’s anti-Arab bigotry and his refusal to treat allies with respect. And most of all, the left would be pointing out that the major benefactor of Bush’s decision, indeed the only US company managing major ports is….

Halliburton!

From Drudge …….

AP FRIDAY NIGHT CLARIFICATION ON BUSH/KATRINA VIDEO
Fri Mar 03 2006 19:48:29 ET

Clarification: Katrina-Video story
ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) _ In a March 1 story, The Associated Press reported that federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees in New Orleans, citing confidential video footage of an Aug. 28 briefing among U.S. officials.

The Army Corps of Engineers considers a breach a hole developing in a levee rather than an overrun. The story should have made clear that Bush was warned about floodwaters overrunning the levees, rather than the levees breaking.

The day before the storm hit, Bush was told there were grave concerns that the levees could be overrun. It wasn’t until the next morning, as the storm was hitting, that Michael Brown, then head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, said Bush had inquired about reports of breaches. Bush did not participate in that briefing.

Regarding Bush pleading ignorance, saying he knew the levees could be topped but NO ONE told him they could be breached, well…it’s the only defense he has, so I guess we’ll have to check up on it.

Unless it, ahem, holds water, that video of him being briefed will look GREAT in Democratic ads this fall.

As the poet said, even the President of the United States sometimes has had to stand naked.

Video might not lie, but the AP does all the time.

There is an obvious difference between a levee being breached and a levee being overtopped. In the days leading up the hurricane Bush asked people to leave the area and he asked Nagin to evacuate the city. Now it seems Blanco was telling Bush the levees were still intact when they were not.

So, in an obvious attempt to trash Bush the press is doing its usual and so are you. Meanwhile anyone with a D behind their name gets a pass. same old same old.

I’m sorry, RogerA, I really cannot deduce how you think I am posing, and the stream of conciousness following the above-quoted excerpt provides me no additional clues. As you apparently haven’t noticed, I have not really been commenting on the merits of the ports deal here. As this seems to be the substance, such as it is, of your comment, I cannot see how I can be fairly attacked on the issue. Is this something you would care to clarify, or should I assume “poseur” is just excrÈment you keep on hand for general hurling?

No, he is saying that you are trying to make stuff up, usually by some creative twisting. I don’t know why that would surprise anyone, since it is all you have done since you started posting here. (You did hide it well for awhile.)

Oh, for the record, regarding your comment in an earlier topic that people accused you of being a traitor. I don’t think you are a traitor. I think traitors have an inherent intellectual honesty (albeit misguided) that you seem to lack.

You don’t understand the Ben Franklin quote, either. Pathetic. Amazing how so called “liberal” with the ill-concealed “Will to Power” bent all started mouthing that quote at the same time. I encourage everyone to read Franklin’s autobiography.

But don’t let me stop you. I’m enjoying it. Do your part to drive another few million moderates into the GOP by default. Polls are transitory. Disgust with your tactics lasts a lifetime.