The helpful folks at the Poynter Institute point out
A correction by The Guardian retracts the most startling assertion attributed to Seymour Hersh in the speech featured in my earlier post HEAR, HEAR, HERSH. “Not what he meant at all,” says The Guardian, leaving it unclear as to whether the error was a misstatement by Hersh, or a misunderstanding on the part of their reporter, who interviewed Hersh, it turns out, back in July. The key point is:
Hersh has pointed out that he was in no way suggesting that Osama bin Laden was not killed in Pakistan, as reported, upon the president’s authority: he was saying that it was in the aftermath that the lying began.
Now, exactly what does that mean? So far at least, neither Sy nor The Guardian cares to clarify, which is worse than too bad. Who does Hersh allege lied about what in the aftermath of the Bin Laden killing? Must we wait for the book? Is The Guardian content to leave the question hanging?
All of this is, of course, just a fascinating side issue to Hersh’s, to my mind quite correct, flaying of the American news media.
For that, please see http://davemarashsez.blogspot.com/2013/09/hear-hear-hersh.html