,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
Yes, the AP headline is correct. O'Donnell also said the following tonight on-air:
"The information wasn't ready for reporting...[but] we don't know if the information [given to MSNBC by a source close to Deutsche Bank, regarding Trump's loans with Deutsche Bank] is inaccurate."
"The information wasn't ready for reporting...[but] we don't know if the information [given to MSNBC by a source close to Deutsche Bank, regarding Trump's loans with Deutsche Bank] is inaccurate."
O'Donnell is saying: I reported this too early, but may yet be able to report it; I trusted my source enough to discuss it on-air, and continue to trust my source; we have no evidence conclusively contradicting what the source said, and possibly no contradictory evidence at all.
I understand why that's reported out as a retraction—as it is. But those outside journalism may not realize that a "retraction" isn't an admission of falsehood; as here, a story can be retracted simply because *it was reported before its sourcing met the standards for broadcast*.
So while there are no winners here, it must also be said that among the losers are news consumers—many of whom now falsely believe MSNBC disproved its prior reporting, when in fact it's merely that this particular stew wasn't finished cooking yet. All the difference in the world.
