This is the headline and first paragraph of an article in The Washington Post:
Giuliani Is Still Standing By Questionable Figures
The former New York mayor would have us believe that he was off by one percentage point at most in calculating his chances of surviving prostate cancer in Britain. In fact, he was spectacularly wrong the first time and equally wrong the second time. Epidemiologists say that his claim rests on a faulty statistical methodology that would not earn a passing grade at top medical schools in the United States.
The first graf of the article is pretty good work. Indeed, the whole article is pretty good work. I'd like to see it on A1 rather than A6, and I'd like to see Giuliani's lies get mentioned in everyday coverage of the candidate, but baby steps.
That said, most people will still only real the headline. And the headline does not accurately convey the article's conclusions. Giuliani is not "standing by questionable figures.' He's continually "lying about American health care." There's a big difference.
The media really has to get comfortable saying the "L" word.
