See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On October 30th, 2007 at 7:42 am, georgej said:

   Good morning, madam.

   I’m not even sure the entier LAFD has the pumphead pressure to douse this one.

   I predict that the LA Times will NOT issue either a retraction, nor a correction. I further predict that Rutten will vigorously defend his article as a “truth to power, fake but accurate” item.

   And they can’t understand why circulation is down….

2. #2
   On October 30th, 2007 at 8:06 am, DagneyT said:

   The Patterico article, and subsequent comments pointed out something I’ve noticed lately, i.e., Drudge’s succumbing to media hype. He is getting more and more sensationalist, and less believable or reliable. Sad.

3. #3
   On October 30th, 2007 at 8:58 am, PBoilermaker said:

   What an incredible lack of integrity on the part of the LA Times. Granted, this lack of integrity isn’t limited to the LA Times, but what a joke.

4. #4
   On October 30th, 2007 at 8:59 am, pressto said:

   This would be like sending the SF Chronicle a correcting notice and thinking they might publish it.

5. #5
   On October 30th, 2007 at 9:12 am, 30 pcs of silver said:

   It’s a double-edged sword for me on this one, as long as they are working for LA Times, NY Times, etc…at least we know where they are and what they are up to. Think of it like – daycare.

   If they don’t have jobs which seems more and more likely every day…where will they go and what will they be up to? These people are busybodies and will find some way to get into trouble. We can’t have them running all over the continent. Think of – gitmo.
   ——-
   They don’t have to publish a correction. Corrections are for schmucks. Only people with integrity care about matters like this reflecting poorly on them and the company they represent.

   /sarc off.

6. #6
   On October 30th, 2007 at 11:04 am, LarryD said:

   #4

   One crucial difference. Patterico has published it himself, and he has a fairly well-read blog. Rather a bit different than sending a correction notice by private correspondence and leaving it at that.

   Michelle’s link won’t hurt either.

7. #7
   On October 30th, 2007 at 12:32 pm, josetheguerilla said:

   How is this not illegal? The media is not held responsible for failing to tell a story or for not correcting mistakes. This is straight from the Hugo Chavez play book.

8. #8
   On October 30th, 2007 at 10:01 pm, corona said:

   How about some credit to the one who pointed out this sorry excuse for an article?

   here

9. #9
   On November 1st, 2007 at 10:52 pm, Lucius Vorenus said:

   If you want to learn more about the shenanigans at the LA Times, then read this story:

   Is Huma Abedin an Agent of Saudi Intelligence?
   http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1919649/posts