Washington Post: America's finest source for bad reporting (Palin "slashed" funds story)
Like everyone else, we urge you to wash your hands and engage in social distancing.
Unlike everyone else, we urge you to also help with this smart plan to get more tests, ventilators, and PPE. Everyone can do that plan right now, at home, in just 15 minutes.
If enough people help with the plan we can save lives. Take time out now and help get more desperately-needed supplies.
The Washington Post recently published a blog post about Sarah Palin (in their words) "slash[ing]" funds to a non-profit group. Except, what they got from the state of Alaska alone was over three times what they got from all government sources combined in 2006. Let's take a look at the WaPo's "downstream", the three-eyed fish who gobble up what the WaPo sludges out.
First, there are several digg posts on the story. These link to the WaPo article; looking at the histories of who posted them is left as an exercise:
digg.com/political_opinion/Palin_Slashed_Funding_for_Teen_Moms (UPDATE: now has 1771 diggs, but is also marked as "May be Inaccurate")
Oddly enough, the last two were submitted in the same minute. These posts link to other sites:
Those last five link to:
dailykos.com/story/2008/9/2/19220/39740/973/583820 (typical airhead DK "reporting" that puts an even more partisan spin on the WaPo's spin)
rawstory.com/news/2008/Palin_cut_1.1_million_from_funding_0902.html (a bare rewrite of the WaPo story from Nick Langewis)
americablog.com/2008/09/palin-personally-cut-funding-that-gave.html (Joe Sudbay simply wraps the WaPo story with his brief commnets, such as "Sarah Palin apparently wants those unwed mothers out on the street.")
allspinzone.com/wp/2008/09/02/heres-where-the-issue-is-sarah-palin-cuts-support-for-pregnant-girls/ (braindead attempt at breezy commentary that discusses the WaPo story in a couple paragraphs but takes the WaPo's word for it)
tothecenter.com/news.php?readmore=6991 (just a sploggish rewrite of the WaPo story)
Others discussing this include:
mahablog.com/2008/09/02/what-did-i-miss (mentions it in passing but completely takes WaPo's word for it)
(Dan Savage simply intros a WaPo excerpt with his own vile spin; post is titled "Palin to Teen Moms: Drop Dead")
UPDATE: These others are just as bad or worse than the ones above and all, of course, simply take the WaPo's word and none do any thinking or reporting:
palin_slashed_teen_mom_funding (from Lynn Harris)
blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/09/03/palin-s-handling-of-other-people-s-pregnant-teens.aspx (from Michelle Cottle)
thinkprogress.org/2008/09/03/palin-mccain-mothers (from "Amanda")
washingtonmonthly. com/archives/individual/2008_09/014534.php (Steve Benen; links to Cottle instead of the WaPo)
ask-not-what-bristol-palin-can-do-for-you-ask-what-sarah-palin-can-do-for-your-pregnant-daughter (from "Jessica")
motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/09/9554_palin_veto_teen_moms.html (from Jonathan Stein)
UPDATE 2: Isaac Fitzgerald and Tana Ganeva from AlterNet offer "8 More Shocking Revelations About Sarah Palin" (alternet.org/election08/97350). One of those "shocking" items is as bad as the posts above. It's got over 2600 diggs here, but it's also marked as "May be Inaccurate":
UPDATE 3: As anyone familiar with his blogging could have been expecting, Matt Yglesias fell for the WaPo's tale too:
(The link here before was to another post where MattY got things wrong:
UPDATE 4: NPR also fell for the WaPo's tale, but at least they printed a correction: npr.org/blogs/politics/2008/09/lineitem_irony.html
UPDATE 5: Somewhat surprisingly, ThinkProgress offered somewhat of a correction, noting in an update to their post that the executive director of the non-profit disagreed with the WaPo's assessment. This is similiar to past TP "corrections" in which they just slip something in at the end without making a big deal about it. But, it's at least better than most of the others above.