Not up yet, but will be posted any minute now ...may give insight in WaPo scrubbing

[LiberalHeart]

Editor and Publisher is working on something re this and will have it up soon. Maybe it'll answer some of our questions, or maybe it'll just ask what we've all been asking. Anyway, here's where it'll be:

http://www.eandppub.com/

(I'm talking about the empty links to the Cindy Rx stories)

Edited to provide direct link because the story is posted:

http://www.eandppub.com/2008/09/post-golisano.html

[AlCzervik]

1. it's already up, second story.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

2. Oh, I am sure...

That Len Downie is furiously shoveling some shit that was given him by McCain's people out the door. Furiously. He's probably had Jill Hazlebaker babbling in his ear all day.

[elizfeelinggreat]

3. from your link ...

"We still don't know for certain, but The Washington Post says it had something to do with an "unedited caption" to a video that should not have gone up. But shat about the video itself? And a separate documents file?

We put together the above quiz prompted by a flurry of postings all along the liberal blogosphere after someone discovered there was a Google url link to a Washington Post web story or video that seemingly went up last night -- but now led to an empty page. But since the Comments section on that page remains active, dozens of visitors have now typed in messages ripping the Post or pleading with it to restore or explain. Complicating matters, another Web detective found a separate url suggesting that the Post may have posted documents related to the same story, also now missing. "

[bigtree]

4. that's really incredible

So what does the Post say? Liz Spayd, editor of washingtonpost.com, told E&P an unedited caption was mistakenly posted on the Web site on Wednesday for a video. "It wasn't intended to go on the site," she explained. "We mistakenly published a caption to a video."

Spayd declined to specify if the caption was to a Gosinski video and would not say if the video would eventually be posted: "I am not really saying anything else about it. We don’t say anything about what we haven't published." It's possible that someone jumped the gun and a full report will be launched any time now. She had no explanation for why the Comments section for an empty page remains operating. Washington Post Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli referred questions to Managing Editor Phil Bennett, who had no further information.

http://www.eandppub.com/2008/09/post-golisano.html


something is seriously rotten here

[FatDave]

23. The caption was wrong, so they pulled the story?

Are you telling me that the Washington Post does not have the ability to edit a caption on their website? Have they talked to their webmaster?

I smell a steaming heap of bullshit.

[LiberalHeart]

24. And why didn't they just take down the whole link? n/t

[pleah]

7. That's the part that got me very curious.

I think lonestarnot was right. There must be a lot more to this story than just a rehash.

[jannyk]

5. k&r As I said in another thread: The Wapo removal is maybe going to be bigger than the story itself

[nc4bo]

6. Is this the Tom Gosinski video?

I've got a real short one. It opens with the voice behind the camera asking, "Did John Mccain use his power and position to influence any of the legal proceedings?"

Answer: "Umm, he certainly did...."

[LiberalHeart]

8. Yes, it's related to that video -- and video is posted elsewhere, so...

What's WaPo waiting for?

[jannyk]

13. And here's how the Headline looked on WaPo before the 'scrubbing'

Interview with Tom Gosinski - washingtonpost.com
Tom Gosinski, who formally worked for Sen. John McCain claims that Cindy McCain abused prescription drugs and that Sen. McCain abused his power to keep it a ...
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2008/09/10/VI2008091002883.html - 22 hours

shame they can't 'scrub' Google.

[MiniMe]

25. You linked to the post. There is nothing on your link

[Tangerine LaBamba]

9. That's not "Editor and Publisher"

It's just a part of Editor and Publisher. I'm not sure it carries the same gravitas.

[LiberalHeart]

10. Oh please. It's E&P's blog. Note Strupp and Mitchell posted the story.

Go to editorandpublisher.com to see who they are.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

11. I did, and I corrected my post,

but it still lacks the gravitas, as I mentioned, of E&P. More in the realm of gossip.

[LiberalHeart]

12. Sorry, I didn't see your update.

It lacks nothing. Really, you need to research Strupp and Mitchell.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

No, I don't

Greg Mitchell is a hero of mine, and his latest book is one everybody should read.

But, this chasing after stories that might or might not exist is exactly the kind of nonsense that keeps us all from addressing the much more important matters at hand. The Republicans can throw something out there, and good, Pavlovian Democrats go riding off into the sunset, sure they're going to find - what?

Nothing.

It's like the "lipstick on a pig" silliness.

There are more important matters, and they are immediate. This is just making fools of people who buy into it.

[LiberalHeart]

16. I see: originally it wasn't E&P, then it was just a part of E&P, and now....

...it's just a silly waste of time. It's not like many here have been curious about the possible WaPo scrubbing or anything, so I guess I shouldn't have wasted your valuable time. Soooo very sorry.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

17. Don't be sorry

Lots of people get sucked into trivialities without understanding that they're being gamed. One out of a hundred may prove to be accurate or reality-based, but it's easy to get distracted.

Hence, the incredible number of prescriptions written for people who allegedly suffer from ADD.

[LiberalHeart]

19. Oh, ADD. So that's it. Okay.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

20. Keep on your quest

It just might turn out to be something worthwhile, and then you can come back here and tell me what a fool I was.

I look forward to your gloating.

[LiberalHeart]

21. Um, my quest was to provide a link to a story many are interested in....

The scrubbing or potential scrubbing, in case you missed it. Not a diversion from issues. Nothing to do with the campaigns. Just an odd thing that happened on WaPo's site that people want to see explained (you know, the stuff I said in the OP). My quest is accomplished, but good luck with yours.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

22. It's noble,

and, as I said, I anticipate being proven cynical.

[Lex]

14. Maybe this is why: "WaPo Writers Reprints McCain Talking Points"

McCain has them all sewn up already:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/11/journamalism-iwapoi-write_n_125654.html

[Tangerine LaBamba]

15. The Post has been a Republican mouthpiece

for the past 8 years. After being a subscriber for more than 30 years, I canceled. when they were gung-ho for the invasion of Iraq.

Strangely, though, their Op-Ed page is very often anti-White House. A strange kind of schizoid publication.

[Wednesdays]

18. Something to really make you go "hmm"...and on an ironic day

The "official" version will soon come out to cover up what really happened.