Did anyone happen to screen save the totally tabloid headline at HuffPoo today?

[MichiganVote]

To look at their home and political pages you would think they were Bill Clinton's best friend after posting the headline 'Bill Clinton upstages Hillary Clinton again'. The offending headline is nowhere to be found now.

[JuniperLea]

1. I don't go there anymore... too tabloidy tasting for me...

I will read the occasional bit that is linked from here, but I don't go there... or to dKos, actually.

[MichiganVote]

2. Yeah, I hear ya'. Today was the first time in a long time and all I wanted was a quick

source for the photos of the two women returned to the US via Clinton,Gore, and whoever. So my eyes widened when I saw the headline: Bill Clinton Upstages Hillary Again...I couldn't believe my eyes. When I went back later after posting my disgust to the editors there, everything was mopped up squeaky clean.

There had been over 20,000 posts rejecting the headline.

[Old and In the Way]

3. But that also tells you something about the power of an internet based newspaper

I like Huffpo, because I like their layout that's dominated by pics. If the pic captures my eye, I read the link and, likely, the story. But what's really fascinating to me is the immediate feedback an internet site like this generates. In conventional newspapers, how many times do you read a bad lede and react to it? Not too many, I'll wager. Who has time to do a LTTE? And chances are you don't get to see how others react to the same misinforming headline. As you note (I didn't happen to see HuffPo most of the day), lots of people took exception to it....HuffPo does a lot of titillating fluff pieces, but that also draws a lot of eyes that might not read more important stories otherwise. Immediate feedback is a powerful feature in the new news media. I fully expect HuffPo to become a huge player in online news. Won't surprise me to see more original/investigative reporting being generated there as AP and other news sites decide to do pay-for-play.

[MichiganVote]

4. Oh I agree and in looking at the pages, home and politics, after the "dissent"

it was plain that they were like the Captains of the Titanic hoping to avoid an iceberg. The initial headline was so exceptionally in bad taste that Clinton is practically crowned as a saint. For example, in place of the headline photo that had him front and center in a clear position of authority, subsequent photos showed him receiving flowers from one of the little girls. They are still going to bang him around, the usual with the Clintons, but it was clear from the number of comments this morning that they badly misjudged the mood of people.

For me, the hype became the story. But it did serve as a warning to me. On or offline,just not possible to take the news at face value. Never probably was but at least they made more of a stab at it. Now? Forget it.