Would it be OK with you if CNN posted this headline online: McCain Doesn’t Denounce Obama Death Threat. Um, sorry, that one is actually completely true. Let’s see. OK, how about this:

McCain Supports Death Threats Against Obama

You see the difference? In fact, that headline is more accurate and less misleading than the one I wrote about. But I’m all ears for your explanation on the ethical journalistic equivalency here. Do tell.

“On further review” I see your point more clearly. I missed it, probably b/c I’m blinded by CNN’s lack of commitment to fixing such errors promptly. My inside knowledge of CNN, sadly, dates from the Turner years. I think it’s the level of staffing and the lack of training of staff that ineptly does something unintendly results in something “sleazy or shady.” But that result obviously speaks loudly.

Thanks for clarifying your point.

The hed is text. The hed represents, to me, another example of incompetence in writing, editing and proofreading at CNN, both on air and online. For example, the news crawler earlier this week carried the surname “Sinpson” while the signage above it discussing OJ’s conviction said “Simpson.” This morning, viewers were treated to “the mortagage crisis” repeatedly.

CNN is as affected by the economics of the news biz as print. I’d love to be a fly on the wall watching the process of writing online heds, news crawlers and graphics. I’d also like to know who, if anyone, is charged with actually watching a television set (or computer) to detect and immediately correct such errors.

Conspiracy? No. Incompetence? Much more likely … and, frankly, far more damaging to to the public in the long run.

Thanks for the post — and the phone number.

What I wish is that the media would discuss Obama’s involvement with the New Party. That would be very interesting.

Jeff