Yeah. But how many people were killed? Shouldn’t that be in the story?
Since “big media” bashing (big media being defined as successful, profitable, well-respected news organizations as opposed to a guy in his jammies tapping away at his Dell when he gets bored with Everquest) is all the rage now with those who make an “interesting post” of their blogs, I thought I would pick on the NY Times over the editing of this story:
About 40 Iraqis were killed Wednesday by American forces in an attack near the volatile border with Syria. American officials said they had fired on a suspected guerrilla safe house, but Iraqis said the Americans had strafed civilians at a wedding party.
Both the American and the Iraqi accounts agreed that about 40 people had died. But some Iraqis and several reports in the Arab press said the attack had killed civilians, not insurgents.
The Associated Press quoted Lt. Col. Ziyad al-Jbouri, the deputy police chief of Ramadi, as saying that between 42 and 45 people had died, including 15 children and 10 women.
The Associated Press also quoted Dr. Salah al-Ani, a hospital worker in Ramadi, as saying 45 people were dead.
That was all just in the first 300 words of the article.
Is it any wonder that people are turning to other sources for information like shut-ins, verbal jerk-off artistes, and guys you hope to god never move into your neighborhood?