It doesn't appear to be the case. Here is a statement by Matt Stoller that was published in the San Fransisco Chronicle without any follow up or qualification by the author:
Bloggers like Matt Stoller of mydd.com are more worried about what the network's post-debate spin could be. When Fox broadcast a Democratic candidate debate in September 2003, Stoller noted that the network's post-debate story was headlined, "Democratic Candidates Offer Grim View of America." It cut away early from the show, Stoller said, giving conservative pundit William Bennett first crack at post-debate analysis.But according to this post, it never happened. Where is the journalistic integrity? Do you just believe whatever someone says, or do you check to make sure it's correct before you publish it? Even if he is just publishing why they say they're upset, there should at least be some setting the record straight and letting the reader know that what had just been stated was inaccurate.
(via)
Tags:
