Time magazine retracted the story this thread was based on January 24, 2003 8:22 AM   Subscribe

Since there was a heated debate over this thread. It is worth noting that Time magazine has retracted the story the thread is based on.
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood to MetaFilter-Related at 8:22 AM (16 comments total)

Why not link it in the thread for others to see? Pretty big gaffe on the part of Time (of all people), btw.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 8:57 AM on January 24, 2003

D'oh! Why does Time magazine hate America so much?
posted by jonson at 9:05 AM on January 24, 2003

I'm not sure there's much to be done, the issue's been debated, everybody took their sides, and now it turns out to be bogus. The sad nature of retractions is that they get stuck in page four, in small print, long after the damage has been done. Thanks for bringing this to our attention though.
posted by Pollomacho at 9:19 AM on January 24, 2003

Nice catch, S@L.
posted by Vidiot at 10:06 AM on January 24, 2003

And the issue being debated isn't even about GWB...its about slavery in terms of how the fpp was put. Might as well posted a link about whether succession was treason, b/c thats what the thread turned out to be about.
posted by jmd82 at 10:14 AM on January 24, 2003

so the rebel bastards finally got to Time, eh?
posted by quonsar at 10:42 AM on January 24, 2003

Joshua Marshall's take on this appalling gaffe

AOL Time Warner is such a notorious radical slanderous organization, worse than the NYTimes -- I bet Ann Coulter will soon order the bombing of the TimeLife building, too
posted by matteo at 11:29 AM on January 24, 2003

I bet Ann Coulter will soon order the bombing of the TimeLife building, too

Pshaw. Ms. Coulter has never ordered the bombing of anything. She just dreams that the bad guys will someday....*
posted by hama7 at 4:31 PM on January 24, 2003

I'm boycotting Captain Beefheart, Winamp and The Lord of The Rings.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 4:31 PM on January 24, 2003

I picked up a Time a few days ago, for the first time in probably ten years, just to confirm how the cover story is almost always a teaser, and how reading Time journalism feels like television journalism in print: glossy, superficial, bland. Crap for the masses!
posted by ParisParamus at 7:23 PM on January 24, 2003

Ann won't order the bombing of the TimeLife building, she'll order them all to be converted to Christianity at gunpoint. That's kind of her deal...
posted by vraxoin at 7:25 PM on January 24, 2003

And while we're at it... (I've been looking for a convenient place to park this update for months)

Remember this thread? Hoax.
posted by Shadowkeeper at 10:11 AM on January 26, 2003

I think this would have made a decent front page post, Steve_at_Linnwood. Anyway, I loved Josh Marshall's cute little jab:

Time.com has now retracted the story. That's web journalism for ya! Sheesh...

Touche! Oh, and btw, did anyone else notice the tagline of the site in Shadowkeeper's 2nd link?
posted by mediareport at 7:35 PM on January 26, 2003

Ha! I hadn't noticed that myself.
posted by Shadowkeeper at 9:22 AM on January 27, 2003

I hate to be the bearer of idiotic tidings but...what exactly is a tagline?
posted by tristeza at 9:55 AM on January 27, 2003

In the example I mentioned, tristeza, it's the part that starts "The Web Has Consumed Me. Save Yourself."
posted by mediareport at 7:41 AM on January 30, 2003

« Older What would it take to cure it?   |   The recent hardware upgrade left the server... Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments