So, the NYT runs a story online about The Organizer’s recent private meeting with news columnists, but in the next day’s print version of the same piece, a paragraph is changed. The original online paragraph is this:
“In his meeting with the columnists, Mr. Obama indicated that he did not see enough cable television to fully appreciate the anxiety after the attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, and made clear that he plans to step up his public arguments.”
Soon realizing that such a paragraph might prove embarrassing to their favorite POTUS, the NYT changes the paragraph on their site (with no explanation of the change, a major journalistic no-no) to this:
“Mr. Obama argued that while there were potentially threats that would merit the kind of investment of lives and money equivalent to that made in the Iraq war, the Islamic State does not pose an existential threat to the United States and therefore the response should be measured. The United States needs to take on the group, in part to defend allies in the region, he said, but it should not be an all-out war.
Moreover, he added, part of the group’s strategy is to draw the United States into a broader military entanglement in the region. A sustained but limited campaign may be slow and politically unsatisfying, but ultimately will be more successful, he contended.”
IOW, the NYT excised a paragraph which might support the ‘out of touch’ meme conservatives have on Obama, and instead inserted Obama’s talking points.
After heat starts to generate for this journalistic impropriety, a NYT point-person says the original paragraph was “trimmed for space”.
Umm… except their change is more than twice the length of the original.
This is why the public’s trust in the MSM is near Congress-level depths.