My thoughts: I think it's a good correction because this is the same type of "journalism" we would point to when talking about how liberal rags are full of shit.
Trump, himself, has been the target of such dishonest reports and his supporters should know that.
Are we just going to ignore the almost certainly biased Never Back Down tweet? I don't even know (or care) who they are but I'd be willing to bet a lot of money on that being an uncharitable characterization of what happened.
I don't get why people are so fucking worked up about mud slinging during the primaries. Nobody but obsessive weirdos pay attention to this stuff, and plenty of it goes in every direction so focusing on specific instances is stupid.
I don't even know (or care) who they are but I'd be willing to bet a lot of money on that being an uncharitable characterization of what happened.
I'm not sure about the best way of handling it. The tweet was unprofessional, but it did explain what was going on and had a visual aid in the picture.
If someone wrote an article debunking it, posting the link to that article would've been more professional. But I doubt something like that would be enough to justify an article.
My thoughts: I think it's a good correction because this is the same type of "journalism" we would point to when talking about how liberal rags are full of shit.
Trump, himself, has been the target of such dishonest reports and his supporters should know that.
Are we just going to ignore the almost certainly biased Never Back Down tweet? I don't even know (or care) who they are but I'd be willing to bet a lot of money on that being an uncharitable characterization of what happened.
I don't get why people are so fucking worked up about mud slinging during the primaries. Nobody but obsessive weirdos pay attention to this stuff, and plenty of it goes in every direction so focusing on specific instances is stupid.
I'm not sure about the best way of handling it. The tweet was unprofessional, but it did explain what was going on and had a visual aid in the picture.
If someone wrote an article debunking it, posting the link to that article would've been more professional. But I doubt something like that would be enough to justify an article.