> followed by a correction.
This is not useful most of the time. I've never seen a viral correction. Damage is done.
This is not useful most of the time. I've never seen a viral correction. Damage is done.
Second, the point is not that reputable newspapers perfectly correct their readership's understanding. The point is that reputable newspapers correct themselves. Newspapers reputations are built on that honesty, and astute readers will have an understanding of a paper's track-record of accuracy and corrections. Less astute readers will rely on those that do track such things.