BRIT PAPERS STUFF UP AND WRONGLY REPORT THAT OBAMA WON NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY
January 11th 2008 02:27
Senator Hillary Clinton of course won the Democratic primary in New Hampshire, but according to several major UK papers, Senator Barack Obama won.
Patrick Goss, MSN.uk’s technology editor, summed up the gaffes reporting, "'Iowa... Hampshire... America? Barack Obama's incredible journey' announced the edition of The Independent that landed on my desk this morning, with a page three feature on 'How Senator Obama gained the momentum.' The Telegraph's front page story was titled 'McCain and Obama take second round.' The Times' article on the US election in '08 talks of Hillary Clinton watching her support 'melt away.'"
Of this, the Poynter Institute said, “Unfortunately, comments are not allowed on that post. It would be interesting to see readers' responses to that remark, which might be viewed as shrugging off responsibility for accuracy in print about breaking news.”
| 48 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Harry
Sydney Diary
Personals
Brisbane Diarystar
Zoo Parent
Comment by Peter Olszewski
But good journos are supposed to be able to work fast AND accurately.
This British stuff up is really bad - possibly because of the time distance they had a guess for the print edition - and guessed wrong.
But of course, guessing, whether they get it right or wrong, used to be a big no no