Okay I will give you an example here, Maggy. A few days back the ruling on the CO baker (who refused to participate in gay marriages) won his case in the high court not to have bake cakes for gay weddings, whilst not falling foul of CO's civil rights laws:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.dff35124ccf7
Now the decision was 7-2 in favor of him. What did WaPo / USA Today etc all run with as a headline?
Quote:
|
Supreme Court rules narrowly for Colorado baker who wouldn’t make same-sex wedding cake
|
That was the headline, this was the first line:
Quote:
|
WASHINGTON — Supreme Court rules narrowly for Colorado baker who wouldn’t make same-sex wedding cake.
|
Now this was not narrow - not by any stretch of the imagination. A narrow decision by the Supremes is usually 5-4. Sure this is not a unanimous decision (no dissenting votes) but by no stretch of the imagination is this "narrow".
As shown by the fact that the follow up stories (all in the WaPo) all had the following headlines:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...eaf_story.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...eaf_story.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...2b1_story.html
Notice how they took out the word narrow? Now they knew what the majority was all along - they knew that it wasn't 5 to 4. They still editorialized it as "narrow" to begin with.
USA Today was the same - I did check through the AP and these were not linking of an AP story, nor Reuters. They had their own individual reporting on the issue. This, in no way was a narrow decision - you have to be numerically challenged to think that.
When the Halbig decision came down (6-3) WaPo even stated that because it wasn't a 5-4 ruling that it shouldn't be seen as a "close" ruling but that it had broad consensus among the court's justices.
Yet in this case, a 7 to 2 ruling was close? They knew how full of it they were so they did issue corrections but their sheer audacity to print such stuff is staggering.
So, you tell me - is that fake news? Whether it is indicative of the entire WaPo is another matter but the article headline is clearly wrong given their own admission and corrections later, but does that constitute fake news? You be the judge.