menu_open Columnists
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close

Stelter Hung Out to Dry a Second Time This week – Says Network Backed Report, Then Sees Two Corrections

23 0
13.03.2026

Get access to Brad Slager's "Riffed From the Headlines," a daily VIP feature where he looks to bring accountability to the mainstream media. Use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership!

Prose & Contradiction – CNN

That is twice now this week, Brian…

That is twice now this week, Brian…

Earlier, we covered how CNN was compelled to take down a post that was sympathetic to the New York City ISIS bombers. In trying to sell this as little more than a social media fumble, Brian Stelter declared that the article it featured was “sound.” Then it was explained how the wording from the post had been direct from the article, and that passage was struck from the piece.

Well…it happened again. It all begins with Pete Hegseth this morning at a Pentagon presser, slamming CNN for suggesting that the military had never planned for Iran wanting to close down the Strait of Hormuz. There was pout-rage across the network, and Brian announced that the network was steadfastly standing behind its reporting.

Then, later, it was seen that the network actually went in and altered the reporting, and followed with a second correction – that it was fully backing.

"The network stands by its reporting."What does @BrianStelter now say as the network went in and altered that story? https://t.co/LyUrC23vd9 pic.twitter.com/QUZcBuRJyS— Brad Slager: CNN Lifetime Subscriber (@MartiniShark) March 13, 2026

"The network stands by its reporting."What does @BrianStelter now say as the network went in and altered that story? https://t.co/LyUrC23vd9 pic.twitter.com/QUZcBuRJyS

Body Checking the Fact-Checkers – ASSOCIATED PRESS

Quoting a report directly earns you a FALSE grade if they don’t like it. Or…you.

Quoting a report directly earns you a FALSE grade if they don’t like it. Or…you.

The AP decided that it would address what it considered to be a falsehood told by Karoline Leavitt. The key phrase there would be "what it considered," because ultimately, what they showed was Leavitt being 100 percent accurate.

Here are the contested words........

© Townhall