[url=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&e=1&u=/ap/20041008/ap_on_el_pr/debate_rdp]Economy, Iraq War Frame Bush-Kerry Debate
[/quote]
Posted at 2:59 pm on Friday, 10/08/04:
Methinks an article was released a little early…
Daniel
[url=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&e=1&u=/ap/20041008/ap_on_el_pr/debate_rdp]Economy, Iraq War Frame Bush-Kerry Debate
[/quote]
Posted at 2:59 pm on Friday, 10/08/04:
Methinks an article was released a little early…
Daniel
Ah, yes, the AP–The Daily Show of the Internet . . .
Calling them The Daily Show honeors them beyond their measure. C’mon guys, at least TRY to pretend you don’t write this all up beforehand.
[…]
Looks like they caught the error. I have a snap, if anyone doubts. It was all in past tense…the latest is in futures tense.
" Presidential Elections - AP
Economy, Iraq War Frame Bush-Kerry Debate
17 minutes ago
By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer
ST. LOUIS - President Bush (news - web sites) and Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites) faced questions from an audience of uncommitted voters in their second debate Friday night, with tepid jobs numbers and the war in Iraq (news - web sites) certain to be points of contention.
The 90-minute encounter came eight days after the candidates’ initial faceoff, which seemed to give Democrat Kerry a boost. The Massachusetts senator had a slight lead in an Associated Press-Ipsos poll concluded on the eve of the debate.
This time the setup was different. Uncommitted voters chosen by the Gallup Organization wrote out questions in advance, and 15-20 selected questioners were to address the candidates on nationwide TV in a town hall-style format at Washington University.
"
Yep–the article, unlike my atrocious coding in the OP, is now fixed.
Honestly, I can understand why they wrote it up the way they did: their Overlords probably want them to have a full article on the debate written within a few minutes of the debate’s end, and writing up the basic framework of the article beforehand allows them to fill in the details during or right after the debate, giving them an extra precious few minutes.
And nothing in the article as it was written is likely to be wrong: they didn’t have any sort of controversial prediction, like who would win or whether there would be any soundbites or anything like that.
Still, it’s pretty damn sloppy to let that article go up without proofing it.
Daniel
MSNBC still hasn’t fixed it.
The Minneapolis Star-Tribune noted that a man had emailed a letter to the editor praising Dick Cheney’s competence in the VP debate and criticizing Edwards’ poor showing.
It was emailed to the editor over three hours before the debate even started.