It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: AP Retracts 'Clinton Booed' Story

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:24 PM
link   
The AP has had to retract a story based on liberal media bias yet again, the "heartless" Republicans would certainly rejoice at the news of Bill Clinton's health problems, or would they? Check the transcript from the first link, the crowd applauded (not the fact that Clinton was ill, but in support), a disingenuous attempt to portray President Bush's supporters in a negative light.
 



www.newsmax.com
The Associated Press has retracted its Friday afternoon report that a crowd at a Bush rally in West Allis, Wisconsin booed when President Bush offered ex-President Clinton best wishes for a speedy recovery from coronary bypass surgery scheduled for next week.

In a report that moved on the AP wire at 9:27 a.m. Saturday, the AP said:
"This is a correction to an incorrect story posted by AP on Friday stating the crowd booed the President when he sent his good wishes. The crowd, in fact, did NOT boo."
A transcript of Bush's remarks released by the White House noted applause after Bush's offered Clinton "best wishes for a swift and speedy recovery."



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The "Clinton Booed" story is disappearing fast, yet without mention why. Links that were available just scant hours ago have been removed. Yet no widespread coverage of the retraction (I will admit in the face on Hurricane Frances, and the Terrorist attack in Russia this is a back page story, but at least put it on the back page).

Related News Links:
www.jsonline.com
www.boston.com
www.foxnews.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 9-4-2004 by Valhall]




posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
The AP has had to retract a story based on liberal media bias yet again,
*SNIP*


Yet again? When has AP ever had to retract a story based on liberal bias? Is it because they refuse to call the "war on terror" the "struggle against ideological extremists who do not believe in free societies who happen to use terror as a weapon to try to shake the conscience of the free world" like Bush wants?



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by curme
Yet again? When has AP ever had to retract a story based on liberal bias? Is it because they refuse to call the "war on terror"*Snip*


Yes.

Here's a case.



Hence, this bizarre April 18th follow up to the April 17th AP story:

The Associated Press erroneously reported.... that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich predicted Hillary Clinton would easily defeat New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani in this year's New York Senate race.

Gingrich said Clinton had "a very good chance" of beating Giuliani and added, "If I were guessing right now, I would say she probably has the edge to win."

The story also erroneously reported that Gingrich said Texas Gov. George W. Bush needs to bring in more experienced advisers to run his presidential campaign. Gingrich did say that Bush's team "still has a little bit of Austin in their style" and is "not quite up to speed yet" in running a national campaign.

The funny thing is that AP repeated his quotes, and while saying they "erroneously reported" his words, they basically repeated their assessment of his remarks


Vintage Newt Gingrich misquote.

More AP fun.

Not the AP, but "Rather" interesting.

The AP out to get the evil pharmaceutical companies.

Coup de Grace, AP "journalist" credibility.

Its okay, the fact that the bulk of the world media is liberal is accepted by conservatives; well address each misrepresentation one propagandist attempt at a time.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
The "Clinton Booed" story is disappearing fast, yet without mention why. Links that were available just scant hours ago have been removed. Yet no widespread coverage of the retraction (I will admit in the face on Hurricane Frances, and the Terrorist attack in Russia this is a back page story, but at least put it on the back page).


Perhaps the reason they aren't pushing the story is it's made up my dear Mirth. We went through the discrepencies in that page (www.boston.com) in the ATS discussion thread yesterday. It's fake.

Shortly after Drudge reported the "AP RETRACTS" story yesterday, it was removed from the site... I imagine after people trying to confirm it (like me) e-mailed AP and Drudge for proof it was from AP and not a fake page to begin with.

Take a good look at www.drudgereport.com... now. The Clinton Boo'ed / AP retracts kind of bombshell Matt Drudge lives for is replaced with the real AP story that huge steaming piles of lying crap like Newsmax call a "retraction."

Now take a good look at that NEWSMAX story (that Matt Drudge already dropped and you can't find anywhere else including a search of the AP.org website).

And when you're done take a look at ATSNN and what it's become this election.

Like I keep saying, nobody boo'ed but neither did the Associated Press say they did. That's a right wing nontroversy to discredit the press and make blog time. WE ARE BETTER THAN THAT.

So let's at least confirm it before reposting NEWSMAX on ATSNN.

And if I'm wrong I'm wrong. Then I'll happily condemn AP for this story when someone shows me a real AP retraction, as I'm probably due to be wrong on something by now.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
Perhaps the reason they aren't pushing the story is it's made up my dear Mirth. We went through the discrepencies in that page (www.boston.com) in the ATS discussion thread yesterday. It's fake.

Shortly after Drudge reported the "AP RETRACTS" story yesterday, it was removed from the site... I imagine after people trying to confirm it (like me) e-mailed AP and Drudge for proof it was from AP and not a fake page to begin with.

Take a good look at www.drudgereport.com... now. The Clinton Boo'ed / AP retracts kind of bombshell Matt Drudge lives for is replaced with the real AP story that huge steaming piles of lying crap like Newsmax call a "retraction."

Now take a good look at that NEWSMAX story (that Matt Drudge already dropped and you can't find anywhere else including a search of the AP.org website).

And when you're done take a look at ATSNN and what it's become this election.

Like I keep saying, nobody boo'ed but neither did the Associated Press say they did. That's a right wing nontroversy to discredit the press and make blog time. WE ARE BETTER THAN THAT.

So let's at least confirm it before reposting NEWSMAX on ATSNN.

And if I'm wrong I'm wrong. Then I'll happily condemn AP for this story when someone shows me a real AP retraction, as I'm probably due to be wrong on something by now.


Thanks for you concern, if I didn't have liberals looking out for me who knows what kind of trouble I could get in? You mention the current AP story from New York, so did I, its the Fox link in my original post (you didnt want that cookie did you
). I also used Grady Philpotts original thread on the subject, which includes a link to WCCO channel 4, Minneapolis. His link which previously contained the story about the Boos now has the current AP story. Did they have a redirected broadcast as well? This is a conspiracy site (though this is a news section) maybe we should investigate the openness of APs journalistic integrity or lack thereof?



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 02:07 PM
link   
I, for one, made a smartass remark about Bush supporters and their hateful mentality after reading that story in a thread on this board.

I apologize to all Bush supporters for anything offensive I said in my post ...



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
Thanks for you concern, if I didn't have liberals looking out for me who knows what kind of trouble I could get in? You mention the current AP story from New York, so did I, its the Fox link in my original post (you didnt want that cookie did you
). I also used Grady Philpotts original thread on the subject, which includes a link to WCCO channel 4, Minneapolis. His link which previously contained the story about the Boos now has the current AP story. Did they have a redirected broadcast as well? This is a conspiracy site (though this is a news section) maybe we should investigate the openness of APs journalistic integrity or lack thereof?


SHOW ME THE WORDS MIRTH.

The first thing I did after your post was read the Fox News story looking for confirmation AP issued the "fake story" in the first place. I know Fox carries the real AP story. I know nobody boo'ed. The Minneapolis link carried the real story all the time as well.

If I'm not mistaken (and I take great pride in not being when it come to you)
Grady's initial post yesterday was about Clinton being hospitalized. It was after NativeOkie posted the Clinton Boo'ed FAKE PAGE in question (second post), that Grady edited the title to reflect a new subject.

Perhaps Grady can illuminate this issue for us, but I know that if something changed in his link it was within a minute as I read that thread and link when it appeared.

What say you anyway about Drudge pulling the "AP retracts" line? Is he out of the "conspiracy game" now? Do I have to notify AP about Newsmax now to get it pulled too? Do I really have to tell on ATSNN?


Retractions don't go away friend. It would be on AP.org. The Internet is quite an unforgiving beast, and I'm pretty sure one or two links to an "original story" and "AP retracts" statement would exist somewhere besides the Axis of Deception currently including Newsmax, Mirthful Me and ATSNN. I further assure you Matt Drudge is not complicit to the "liberal media" nor is FOX NEWS. And we'd have an AP retracts story to point to if true.

Show me the words Mirth. I want to see AP Retracts issued by The Associated Press, or for the love of peanuts at least Fox News.

Show me please. That is, of course, somewhere besides Newsmax and now ATSNN.

We have exposed a fake page so far. And that's damned impressive.
What we don't have is a conspiracy to lie from the Associated Press. And it's wrong to claim one.

PS - Do we need to dissect what's wrong with that fake page all over again? That is not AP writing IMHO. It's obvious it's fake. Look at the real stories issued by that paper too. See how they use the AP by-line, author name and AP logo. Do any of those pages have a LINK to go back to the Boston paper? Didn't think so because they are on the paper already unlike that bogus site being claimed as an AP release.

[edit on 4-9-2004 by RANT]



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Quietly, without mention or update, even your favorite "fake page" no longer mentions boos. Did we all hallucinate this byline? I would submit that AP has recognized it's error and amended it without widespread mention (which is the REAL crux of my post). Please review the current state of the oft referenced "redirected" link.

www.boston.com...


[edit on 4/9/2004 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Your search - "This is a correction to an incorrect story posted by AP on Friday stating the crowd booed the President when he sent his good wishes. The crowd, in fact, did NOT boo." - did not match any documents.

As laughable as the newsmax "quote" from AP is, I'm trying to help you prove this story anyway.

If it's a conspiracy...
GOOGLE IS IN ON IT!!!




posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
Your search - "This is a correction to an incorrect story posted by AP on Friday stating the crowd booed the President when he sent his good wishes. The crowd, in fact, did NOT boo." - did not match any documents.

As laughable as the newsmax "quote" from AP is, I'm trying to help you prove this story anyway.

If it's a conspiracy...
GOOGLE IS IN ON IT!!!



As much as I disdain participating in IPOs, it appears my substantial purchase has paid off.
GOP now can stand for "Google Obfuscation Party".

p.s. Thanks for being such a good sport.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
Quietly, without mention or update, even your favorite "fake page" no longer mentions boos. Did we all hallucinate this byline? I would submit that AP has recognized it's error and amended it without widespread mention (which is the REAL crux of my post). Please review the current state of the oft referenced "redirected" link.

www.boston.com...


The FAKE PAGE has indeed changed.
Yet only since we started this discussion this afternoon. Interesting. Not to cast further assumptions of foul play... but in the culprits haste to "prove" AP bias...they forgot to change the date for the new story. Some paper.


Newsmax claims the retraction and new story came out this morning:

In a report that moved on the AP wire at 9:27 a.m. Saturday, the AP said: ("quote" posted above)


The page in question still says yesterday:

By Associated Press, 9/3/2004 18:06
...and still looks no more authentic compared to the real stories from the paper.
www.boston.com...:.shtml

Look at the layout, color background, ads, lack of that lame link back, press by-line...my God man, do you not want to see it?

And the fact it just changed during our conversation is disturbing me greatly.

Change the date whoever you are. At least try to fool somebody!



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Guess this one hasn't been updated yet. Direct from NBC.



www.wstm.com
WEST ALLIS, Wisconsin President Bush is sending former President Clinton "best wishes for a swift and smooth recovery."

At a state fairgrounds rally in Wisconsin, the president told backers Clinton is in America's thoughts and prayers -- as he faces heart bypass surgery in a New York hospital.

Many in Bush's audience booed when Clinton's name was mentioned. The president made no comment on that and continued with his rally speech.

In June, Bush invited the former president and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to the White House for the unveiling of their official portraits. Bush praised his predecessor as a man of knowledge and compassion who has "the forward-looking spirit that Americans like in a president."


www.wstm.com...

[edit on 4/9/2004 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 03:29 PM
link   
That was fun.


I'd still really like to sink my teeth in the official AP release, but I buy that link you just found as proof.


Bows to Mirth

Mucho Applause



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 03:34 PM
link   
Now for extra credit, lets see how long before the "updated" version of the AP story is silently inserted in place of the original at this link

It will happen.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 03:55 PM
link   
I, for one, made a smartass remark about Bush supporters and their hateful mentality after reading that story in a thread on this board.

I apologize to all Bush supporters for anything offensive I said in my post ...


Regarding my earlier post, if there are right wing dirty tricks going on here, then I take my apology back.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 03:57 PM
link   
Point of nuance.

Is it possible, AP wrote two or more stories. The one about Bush backers boo'ing, and the one's people keep pointing to as "retractions" including the story on Bush's speech and the story on Clinton's surgery and NEVER issued a retraction as "quoted" on Newsmax?

Stories could be replaced (and freqently are) with new ones, but nothing other than the official White House version is discounting what AP initially reported is it?

That would mean people indeed boo'ed, AP reported it, and the "right wing media" (that we know it really is) is replacing stories quietly all over the country that made Republicans look bad as NewsMax trumps up the "AP retracts" angle, yet to be proven.

As I was asserting before a "retraction" could be found, and Newsmax's version of one doesn't sound very AP.

It's entirely possible one exists, but we are yet to validate it. If Newsmax got a real "retraction" off the wire, can't we get a copy? Anyone here in the press?

I acknowledge there are two or more stories out there and indeed legitimate press wrote that Clinton was boo'ed (though I never believed that first link). But do we really know AP retracted that?

Is it impossible to believe a state fairgrounds crowd in Wisconsin boo'ed Clinton? They did at Nascar.

Is the poster in Grady's thread that claimed to have heard the boo's mistaken?


I watched the Bush speech and heard the boos. It was pathetic and sickening...they gave more of a cheer for the Russians, then they did our former President.


Did an AP reporter make it up and expect to get away with it? Does no one in Wisconsin read the paper?

Or like I said are stories just being replaced with new one's partial to the President and no AP retraction ever occured?

We can really take NewsMax's "word" or look further.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
"right wing media" (that we know it really is)

would this be the media that in a throw back to man-bashing loves to report on any instance of the president being refered to as a "cowboy"?

[edit on 4-9-2004 by keholmes]



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 05:26 PM
link   
Speculation is fun, but calling the source is better.


After calling my local bureau, then being directed to Wisconsin, then ending up at AP HQ and speaking up the chain to three people..I got answers.

Once vetted as a reporter myself
I got the man on the wire computer. We looked up the NewsMax date given, the time given, the quote given, then ALL RETRACTIONS given and none were even close to:


In a report that moved on the AP wire at 9:27 a.m. Saturday, the AP said:

"This is a correction to an incorrect story posted by AP on Friday stating the crowd booed the President when he sent his good wishes. The crowd, in fact, did NOT boo."


Note Newsmax is claiming this self described "correction" came today.

While the Associated Press, once it had debunked claims of a "retraction" did enlighten me to the history of the story.

Within thirty minutes of the first release YESTERDAY that "Clinton was boo'ed" the updates began (like I was told they do with all stories) and the very first changed to "ooo'ed" (weak I know). Then he went through a series of updates and additions made to the story since then, details, names, etc. Apparently stories change alot during the shelf life up until Sunday press, as the local coverage that first gets fed in the system is pretty much a "flavor" of a developing story.

Pressed about the NewsMax statement attributed to AP, AP's 'official' response was "What's NewsMax?" (That made my day).


But it does seem we have a split decision. AP (or the reporter on the scene) did report "boo" then AP slipped that weak line about "ooo" in to sanitize it, before updating further as they apparently have several times. So some bias may indeed exist with the reporter (unless he's the only one telling the truth here), though it sure got caught and removed quick.

But it seems there's also a REAL CONTROVERSY to lie being perpetrated by NewsMax. As with anything they "quote" caution is warranted.

Maybe the real scandal and ATS scoop here is: NewsMax Claims False Retraction by AP.

Even Drudge pulled that line within hours!!! But I rest better now knowing NewsMax is same as it ever was, and humby request if we don't make news stories out of Capital Hill Blue or any other left wing spin masters... we do the same with NewsLax.


Phone numbers I called available to ATSNN staff.



posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 06:21 PM
link   
I'll take all of this on good faith, but it doesn't let AP off the hook. They quietly massaged the story when they realized that the reporter was "mistaken". I look forward to the final disposition of this event which I feel demonstrates a certain credibility gap with AP.

NewsMax is partisan in which story they choose to include on their website, but they are usually just wire stories that fit their agenda. Both sides of the isle have this "selective" portrayal of current events.

Maybe Shakespeare should have added journalists to his "Lawyer Solution"



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 03:24 AM
link   
This is what partisanism does. It makes it so that stupid s*** that doesn't matter will get reported so one party can get some kind of meaningless dig against the other. You don't like Bill Clinton? Cool. You are angry at other people who don't like him and booed him? Awesome, now cover a story that god damned matters. The media as a whole doesn't have a left-wing bias or a right-wing bias, it has a stupidity bias and we as a whole aren't doing anything to keep them from perpetuating that because the papers are right when they think most people would rather hear about the swift boar veterans for truth 'scandal' than hear about what each candidate's healthcare plan is.

[edit on 5-9-2004 by spngsambigpants]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join