@coldjoint,
PJMedia wrote:On Thursday, the New York Times — America's newspaper of record — published a disgusting false smear against U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley. The original article suggested Haley was responsible for spending $52,701 on curtains for the UN ambassador's house in New York City, when in reality the decision to purchase the curtains was made under former president Barack Obama.
First thing, it wasn't a "disgusting false smear". No accusation against Haley was made.
Quote:The original article had included the important caveat that Haley was not responsible for the curtains, but it buried that key fact in the fourth paragraph.
Duh...
The story, subsequently edited to reflect the loudly voiced concerns of oh-so-sensitive right-wing crybabies, was meant to highlight the extravagance of the purchase. Haley happens to reside there so it's not unreasonable to refer to "her curtains" or "her view". The fact that people didn't read the article carefully and jumped to their own conclusions is regrettable but not untypical. The fact that the false interpretation went viral really shouldn't surprise anyone.
If a media outlet wants to "smear" a public figure it would be more effective not to include exculpating information within the story. The loud and stupid right-wing echo chamber kept that story about Obama having been born in Kenya alive for years — talk about "devoid of shame"! It's curtains for this non-incident; it will be all but forgotten in a few days.