The New York Times has altered its original ‘scoop’ about supposed one-on-one talks with Iran. It has done so without acknowledging the edit, quietly dropping the inconvenient bits down the memory hole:
When the New York Times updated its story late Saturday to reflect Vietor’s statement, the paper made no mention of the update or any correction to the story, leaving readers with the impression that the White House’s denial had been in the story all along. In fact, the initial version of the story portrayed the development as a tentative victory for the Obama administration, which has recently been faced with foreign policy crises in the Middle East and Libya.
The new version of the Times’ story also removed this line about the threat of Iran’s nuclear ambitions: “Even with possible negotiations in the offing, there is no evidence Iran has slowed its fuel production.”
Frankly, who in their right minds believes Iran actually means to negotiate honestly? They’ve played that game over and over and over. Agree to talks, then walk out. They’re like Lucy from Peanuts with the football. Obama gets to play Charlie Brown.
What’s really disturbing is the way the Times simply changes their story in secret. This is not journalistic integrity. Whoa. Did I just type that?
The New York Times and journalistic integrity is a complete oxymoron. Sorry about that.
What’s unsurprising is that they dump inconvenient facts. What is surprising is that they think nobody notices.