I finally get why one small paper apologized and the other dug in after the same campus mess
Two student papers at schools in Ohio ran the same quote from a protest in March, and one pulled it with a note while the other lawyered up and posted a defense. The difference was simple: the paper that apologized admitted the quote was taken out of context and showed the full transcript. The stubborn one just said trust us. Weird how a two sentence correction does more for free speech than a 900 word defense, right? Anyone here seen a newsroom handle a backlash that well?
Reading that the stubborn paper just posted a 900 word defense without showing the actual transcript blows my mind. Like how do you argue context and then hide the context?