From “Not Vouching” for Content to Asserting It in a Headline


Remember that Washington Post article that the Providence Journal republished in substantial part, about which I complained of the credulity of the reporter and lack of context? Well, it looks like even the Washington Post has acknowledged that all the people who surely had that same reaction were right (emphasis added):

Editor’s Note: The Washington Post on Nov. 24 published a story on the work of four sets of researchers who have examined what they say are Russian propaganda efforts to undermine American democracy and interests. One of them was PropOrNot, a group that insists on public anonymity, which issued a report identifying more than 200 websites that, in its view, wittingly or unwittingly published or echoed Russian propaganda. A number of those sites have objected to being included on PropOrNot’s list, and some of the sites, as well as others not on the list, have publicly challenged the group’s methodology and conclusions. The Post, which did not name any of the sites, does not itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings regarding any individual media outlet, nor did the article purport to do so. Since publication of The Post’s story, PropOrNot has removed some sites from its list.

So we go from an article that doesn’t “vouch for the validity” of its content to a headline in the Providence Journal asserting that “Russian propaganda helped spread ‘fake news.'” QED.

  • Rhett Hardwick

    Amazon sends me the “most read Stories of the Washington Post”, every day. They are clearly on the Russians elected Trump bandwagon. One wonders, why wouldn’t the Russians have preferred Clinton. Hadn’t they already bought her with the Uranium deal and contributors to the Clinton Foundation?

    • Rhett Hardwick

      Headlines from today’s WAPO. Fake News?

      Secret CIA assessment says Russia was trying to help Trump win White House

      New push to replace Obamacare reignites old GOP tensions

      Trump draws rebuke after saying U.S. isn’t bound by One China policy

      Why a Trump presidency inspires fear