Fair enough, I intentionally was a little hyperbolic to see what the strongest evidence against my position was. >but there was still a lot of content that was

Fair enough, I intentionally was a little hyperbolic to see what the strongest evidence against my position was. >but there was still a lot of content that wasn't "on message". I do not, however, think this is true in the case of the Iraq War. Once we get into quantity rather than mere existence, we have to consider positioning in the case of the print paper. It may as well not have existed given the positioning and delay. The editorial team buried their reporters' work when it didn't agree with their slant