Quote:
Originally posted by Webby
theking:
Hell knows... but if I thought I was getting a story and paying for it.. I'd want a story.
If that junk can into a newsroom it would be laughed at. It is not surprising they rewrote this. The rewrite actually gives Wrens' popcorn brain some credence she clearly does not deserve.
|
I think you basically answered why they asked "her" if they could run "her" story. They knew she was a unknown reporter working for a local unknown paper and they thought they could get away with printing "their negative story" under her name without repercussion. They thought she would be grateful to them for running a story under her byline...and who knows...she may very well have been until the negativism of the story was blamed upon her. I hope that she can find a way to sue the hell out of them for their "lie"...Reuters is having financial difficulty.
They took a story of a very small town welcoming home a very injured soldier...that virtually everyone knew personally...and turned the story into a "negative story"...a story with an "agenda". Biased and non objective reporting in my books...as well as "lying" about who the author of the story was.