It may just be an updating procedure, gotten (ironically) from the blog world. MSNBC.com now uses highligher backgrounding for updated items in news reports.

Thank God web pages can be cached which is how these idiots get caught.

I saw on Drudge yesterday that Bush's approval rating was holding steady at 33%, but, and I do mean the BIG BUT, congress has an approval rating of 29%. Whoo Hoo. I'm just putting this out there because the constant disingenuous mantra of how low Bush's ratings are by the MSM omits that huge piece of the equation.

The MSM can't die fast enough.

Winston in Orwell's novel was a composite chracter representative of present day government and MSM copy editors.

Sorry for the side-track, but Judy Sgro just went into conniptions...

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070516/exotic_dancers_070516/20070516?hub=Canada

Speaking of "revisionist journalism", I've just posted a thread on my blog that captures our very own Warren Kinsella in the act.

Have a look at: http://keyes.ca/journal/?p=17

All the best,
Andrew

double plus good!

I like how they say put your rifles down this isn't iraq.

lots o shots at bush none at the maniacs there. very politically correct,

Whoaho... what do we have here? Seems like Canada's New-ish-like Government (TM) is taking lessons from the revisionistic media.

CBCpravda , All liberal all the time.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/05/16/stripper-law.html

judy sgro didnt know , judy sgro didnt know , repeat after me , judy sgro didnt know.

CTV(tass) is a little more damning than CBCpravda

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070516/exotic_dancers_070516/20070516?hub=Canada

if the strippers were lactating or Rufus Wainwright they would be praising them.

Hey it is PM Paul Martin the "Peeler" revisited by "Skivvy-gate".

I don't see a problem with websites being changed. There's no or principle to say you can't after all.

Why not rail against MSM reporting that only uses goverment sources for their sourcing.

I don't see a problem with websites being changed.

I do. Journalist "ethics" require corrections not Orwellian we-never-wrote-that-in-the-first place. Sneaky and sleazy.

If I write an accusatory letter, basically the MSM's predicament in this, to someone in pen and ink, with erroneous perceptions at the time, do I get to change the content before their eyes because facts overtake me? That's not really how the world works. Apologies have meaning and are necessary.

I'm trying to warp my mind around your thinking which is basically I don't mind being duped, without any accountability or an apology. Maybe it's a generational thing, but, I demand more from the MSM.

Let's change "warp". Freudian(?), to wrap. Let's also say a silent prayer for aging left-handed dyslexics.

The early story on CNN is likely written by some idiot that thought he/she is going to be the first to report the mayhem, may not have even been on the site.
In news manufacturing business this is quite common. You may remember that there were cases where some of these “journalists” write a story ahead of conclusion of an event hoping that their story is right.
Of course this is unacceptable from news manufacturers. People are not interested who comes with a story first or seventh, as long as they get the news they are interested in and it is accurate.
As long as you get a prize for something there is generally temptation for corruption going on.

I like the idea of highlighting changes, but web-based news reporting is in an interesting space between the constantly updated TV broadcast of a 24 hour news network and the static newspaper.

I think what happens is that a story develops. Before the computer, it would go to print and that would be it until the next day or it would be broadcast on the news and then updated at the next broadcast news if there were changes (like Falwell falling ill and then dying).

The TV stations put their news broadcast text/transcript up on their websites so the story is and should be updated to take into account new information, including corrections.

With the papers, I think it works the opposite way. As a story is being written, it goes up on the site. Once the paper edition is finally edited and printed, the online story stops being updated, becomes "frozen" to reflect the printed edition.

I know that is what happens with the TV online news although I'm a little less certain about the newspapers. It happens constantly if you pay attention to an online story throughout the day. By far most of the changes are updates of information. Some are corrections like typos. Some are corrections of erroneous info. The conspiracy theorists of course are going to whine further about MSM conspiracies and complain. But it's only the latter that we really pick up on.

CNN, CBC, CTV, etc, etc, etc...

...facts? what facts?

Ted, your doing a wonderful job of covering for your pals that lie and twist and cover up and...

I know FREE. If only they would stop lying and twisting and covering up for the Conservatives we might have a semblance of a democracy in this country. But they continue to take the conservative kool-aid so we fight on.

How do you think that these new age liberal left-wing news media would have reported the sinking of the RMS TITANIC or the HINDENBURG OR PREAL HARBOR?

Spurwing: No doubt they would have blamed it somehow on leftist or islamist terrorism.

Seems to me that in the blogging world now, if you base a comment or a post on some piece of internet ephemera - and everything on the net is ephemeral, by its nature - that you're wise to get a screen image of the subject post, preferably showing date and time.

Also to back everything up offline, of course... nothing sadder than months or years of observation, commentary and analysis getting obliterated by a technical failure at your blog provider.

Seems to me that in the blogging world now, if you base a comment or a post on some piece of internet ephemera - and everything on the net is ephemeral, by its nature - that you're wise to get a screen image of the subject post, preferably showing date and time.

Also to back everything up offline, of course... nothing sadder than months or years of observation, commentary and analysis getting obliterated by a technical failure at your blog provider.

Didn't Google Earth replace their satellite pics of New Orleans with pre-Katrina photos recently?