Steve Gilliard claims that he did not write the email I attributed to him in this post. After doing some further investigating, I'm afraid to say that he is correct. He did not write that email. I apologize to Gilliard for not checking with him before publishing my post, and I regret the error.
Gee, damn fine journamalism ya go going there. You guys got spun, and badly. You participated in a smear campaign and the best you can say is, "so sorry, old chaps. Nothing to see here, move along"?
Regretting the error isn't good enough. You may think this is a "minor error" but we do not. Either tell us all or get the fuck out of journalism. That goes for your editor, Franklin Foer, as well. (Frankly, I expect better of him.) Your whole operation is an embarrassment.
(Via Atrios)
Posts
5 comments:
He seemed awfully evasive about that first source. Even if he gives the 2nd & 3rd sources a pass as "an honest mistake", that *still* doesn't explain or excuse the first source providing him with a fake e-mail in the first place.
Dodgy, but I'm sure Peretz & Foer are behind him all the way.
It's all dodgy and it all sucks.
The "correction" will never get the traction that the original smear did.
Which is the normal MO, now isn't it?
Four Legs, please don't join Digby in the outer darkness of bullshit punditry. You wouldn't like consorting with those sanctimonious S.O.Bs. I doubt their attitude toward a manimal, however literate, would be respectful.
And they wouldn't admire Maxx properly. What kind of writer would have an "imaginary cat"? That sort aren't good enough for a Fur Person of Maxx's plushiness.
If His Plushiness is looking at you funny, he probably wants to be brushed, or to have a nice tummy rub.
And they wouldn't admire Maxx properly.
I doubt they would feed him swordfish for dinner either.
Wankers.
I doubt they would feed him swordfish for dinner either.
I hope that's sustainably harvested swordfish.
Maxx is a conscientious kitty.
Post a Comment