Well, it’s not what one might think. They have a correction on an irrelevant point in a completely discredited article — but at least it’s right at the top:
A front-page article on Feb. 21 about Senator John McCain’s record on lobbying and ethics, including his role in the Keating Five case, described incorrectly the reprimand delivered to three other members of the Senate in 1991 for intervening with government regulators on behalf of Charles H. Keating Jr. The Senate Ethics Committee rebuked the three senators for improper behavior, but under a parliamentary agreement the full Senate did not censure them or take any other vote on the matter.
Wow. That really builds the ol’ credibility, doesn’t it? Here we have a story that got held for months while the editors tried to build a case for their accusations. We’ve been told by no less an authority than Dan Rather that we should trust their smear because all involved are, and I quote, “very responsible journalists.”
And these responsible journalists — the ones who accused McCain of possibly thinking of having an affair with a lobbyist on the word of two disgruntled staffers who couldn’t even offer testimony that such an affair had taken place — couldn’t be bothered to fact-check the end result of the Keating Five investigation in the Senate? How hard would it have been to check their own archives for the right information?
Very responsible journalists. Hmmm. Sure. (via Lawhawk)