The New York Times suddenly made a major revision to a supposed bombshell piece late Sunday concerning a resurfaced allegation of sexual assault by Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh — hours after virtually all 2020 Democratic presidential candidates had cited the original article as a reason to impeach Kavanaugh.
The update included the significant detail that several friends of the alleged victim said she did not recall the purported sexual assault in question at all. The Times also stated for the first time that the alleged victim refused to be interviewed, and has made no other comment about the episode.
[...]
The Times' revision says: "Editors' Note: An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book's account regarding an assertion by a Yale classmate that friends of Brett Kavanaugh pushed his penis into the hand of a female student at a drunken dorm party. The book reports that the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article."
Fox News
Sued for what? The article reported that Stier - a witness - recalled it - not that the victim recalled it. The victim may not recall it because it didn't matter that much, she was drunk, she's pro-Kavanaugh, or she doesn't want to be involved - or some other reason. Doesn't mean it didn't happen. And it certainly doesn't mean there's anything to sue the Times for. Also, they didn't "walk back" anything. They added to the report.
UPDATE:
Yes, yes it was. And the Times seems to have fallen several levels in the past several years, but it's not something to be sued over.
UPDATE:
It was a failure to dot the i's and cross the t's, not a correction.
No comments:
Post a Comment