General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: CNN News Staffers Revolt Over Blown Coverage [View all]fasttense
(17,301 posts)They took an obvious loser like bush and got him appointed president with no nationwide revolt by claiming "sore loser" and calling their guy the winner before the votes were counted. They probably thought they could do the same thing with this decision from the Supremes.
They thought if they said the opposite of what was actually decided, they could convince people that the decision was what FOX and CNN wanted. Actually there is precedent for this in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, 118 U.S. 394 (1886). Where a clerk reporter wrote a head note that was NOT what the court ruled, yet most everyone used that head note as if it were true.
So Fox and CNN were just trying to get everyone to believe something that was NOT true. But, this time, it didn't work.