I’m not seeing the problem here. Early media reports are often wrong. Corrections are generally sparse. Incompetence or ignorance seems more likely than something with intent.
Under ordinary circumstances I would agree with you, but when those reports and lack of retractions are accompanied by editorials pushing the same opinion, what you have is something that looks like a dedicated campaign, even if it’s not. When the objectivity of a party expected to be objective is called into question, it behooves those organizations to be more responsible with what they report.
Just in case anyone else wanted to keep discussing the possibility of a conspiracy.
Do you think that there’s a more compelling reason to clarify that there aren’t two I identified murderers on the loose, as opposed to what weapon was used?
Yes, undoubtedly that’s true. But are you seriously suggesting that the delay in correcting the AR-15 error (and the continuing failure to completely correct it) derive only from some view of urgency?
The reports quickly identified the store in Virginia which sold the item in question. Was that identification also of “compelling reason?”
What’s the compelling reason to find the store but continue to perpetuate the AR-15 error?
Is the lack of coverage on the misreporting of the pistol part of this same anti-gun bias?
I don’t see the “continue to perpetuate” situation.
You have presented a single reporter from the NYT who made the correction one day later that the authorities. On the other hand, CNN had corrected the error before 9:00 a.m. the same day that the authorities made their own correction.
I have no idea whether Schmidt of the NYT was dragging his heels or whether he was chasing down a different aspect of the situation (or even a separate story), but I do not see a 24 hour delay by one reporter to be a big deal when other outlets had already provided that information in a timely manner.
Ok, then let’s check my theory. Based on the New York Times story, as currently corrected:
Did the shooter attempt to buy an AR-15?
Bit of a comedown from “the media” and their “bias” there.
Directly, or from the media?
Is Fox a part of the same media problem of which you lament?
Directly, through the Code of Virginia.
Not generally. But that article is from the Associated Press.
Actually, let me correct this statement. Fox News is not generally a part of the specific instance of this problem: holding back on detail about the Ar-15’s non-involvement.
However, they are among the worst offenders in the more general case of this problem: refusing to report on facts which are inconvenient to their narrative. In fact, apart from MSNBC, they may be the absolute worst in this area.
So you admit, then, in this particular instance, since the article I linked to appeared on the Fox News website (yes, they were republishing content from another news provider), and they are responsible for and choose the content they publish, that in this case they did* no differently* than the problem media of which you complain?
I’m waiting for the next desperate question that can somehow show that the media played a vital role in the enactment of Virginia law, or in my being able to read Virginia law.
Sure. In fact, as I indicated above, in other areas, they are offenders in their own right, and champion offenders at that.
When you read this law, was it written down somewhere?
Well, writing is a medium! Take that!
Yes, I suppose he’s desperate enough for that.
What about** this** area? Doesn’t this damage your whole thesis rather badly? What makes this an exception? Apparently Fox News is part of the media that desperately wants to demonize the AR-15!