It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by DrHammondStoat
Originally posted by longlostbrother
reply to post by ZiggyMojo
As I said to you on the other thread:
There's no evidence that he had room mates - that I've seen - certainly none in the OP
There is evidence that some media outlet claimed there was evidence, in the public record - we don't have that evidence
You're missing the point this thread is about one piece of information being erased from articles, not arguing whether the piece of information was factually correct or not. Obviously it would be good to verify the information or not.
Cached articles USED to contain that same quote.. But NONE of them do. I can't find a single article that has that data anymore.
My question is this.. Why erase it completely? Why not just say the initial reports were incorrect?
Originally posted by longlostbrother
Look here:
www.huffingtonpost.com...
Has that story been edited or updated?
Can anyone tell me
Go look and tell me, based on that URL if that story has been edited since it was originally published.
Originally posted by ZiggyMojo
reply to post by longlostbrother
I have no idea, without seeing the article on the first day it was published. If they completely erased information in it, there is no possible way to find out without having a cached copy or knowing the exact string of characters that was deleted.
I'm fine with new agencies ADDING data as long as what they originally reported and published remains intact. I am however not okay with the media removing data from a previously published article without any explanation whatsoever. Public records indicated he had roommates at one time. Whether or not it was during the past months or not is an entirely different issue. The whole point is the media reported something that was verifiable by public record, and they have erased any inclination that they did.. No explanation, and no one would be any wiser. So in ten years if people wanted to look back at that information because the case was reopened or whatever.. It would be as if it never existed.
In the past, digital media wasn't as pertinent to our lives.. So this wasn't an issue. We are now faced with a news flow that is easily manipulated. Paper news is disappearing, and with it so is the integrity and credibility of all news outlets.