Nedra Pickler of the Associated Press today manages to mischaracterize an Obama speech that was seen by millions last night and that is available on demand at YouTube. Here's the offending passage, emphasis is mine:
Obama's advisers were so unprepared for defeat that they didn't even try to explain his loss — some call it spin — to dozens of waiting reporters at his election party. Instead the senior strategists sent out a low-level staffer to explain they were letting Obama's speech stand without further comment.
Obama portrayed Clinton as a kind of political grim reaper in his remarks to supporters who chanted "We want change!" and "Yes we can!" He didn't mention Clinton by name, but referred to her chastising him for raising "false hopes" that he cannot deliver.
Let's go to the videotape and search for...er, I mean, and watch the very beginning of the speech. I'll transcribe:
Thank you! Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, guys, thank you so much. Thank you! Thank you. Thank you. Oh, thank you, New Hampshire. I love you back! Thank you, thank you. Well, thank you so much. I am still fired up and ready to go! Thank you, thank you. Well, first of all, I want to congratulate Senator Clinton on a hard-fought victory here in New Hampshire. She did an outstanding job. Give her a big round of applause!
Seriously, how is it that one comes to write a sentence stating that a 12-minute speech doesn't contain a particular word -- and is wrong?! How can that happen when the New York Times immediately published the transcript and when every web browser has in-line text search? I understand mistakes happening, but I don't understand how the idea that "Clinton" was not said first gets into the article, let alone how it cannot get fact-checked one time before being sent out to hundreds of newspapers and thousands of readers.