SOMEBODY IN THE COMMENTS over at Ed Cone’s blog asked how I do corrections:

When Glenn gets something wrong, how does he handle the situation: Leave the post as is? Silently rewrite/delete it? Rewrite/delete, marking it as Updated? explaining why it was updated?

How does his approach to error handling compare to rowback and other means by which mainstream media sets the record straight?

Minor errors on spelling, phrasing, etc., will just be fixed. (I often correct typos, etc., in reader email, too, as they bug the hell out of me.) For more substantive errors, my basic rule is that I always put in an update correcting the post where the original error was, so that anyone who follows a link to it (or finds it on Google) will see the correction. If the item has scrolled down, and the correction seems significant, I’ll note it again in a separate post so that the correction’s at the top of the page. And I’ll link the new post to the old one so that people can see clearly what was being corrected. I’ll even do that when I’m not certain that the original item was in error, but think the issue has been made significant enough to make sure people hear both versions. (A recent example implicating most of these considerations is here.) On the other hand, your belief that a particular set of facts supports a different conclusion than the conclusion that I draw from those facts doesn’t constitute a factual error on my part, but rather a difference in interpretation. I might indicate it, if I think it’s interesting or possibly persuasive, but I don’t generally treat that as a correction.

Other bloggers are, of course, free to do it their way. But once or twice I’ve been fooled when they posted a later correction but didn’t update the original post. Also, posting corrections in comments rather than as an update to the post itself is probably a bad idea, as lots of people don’t read comments. Those are my thoughts, anyway. Others may feel differently. As to how this compares with Big Media, well, I leave that comparison to the reader.

UPDATE: Here are some thoughts from Rebecca Blood that are worth reading.

BLOGGER SCHEDULED TO argue before the Supreme Court. I’ll bet he won’t wear pajamas.

MORE SPACE-BLOGGING, over at GlennReynolds.com.

HERE’S MORE BLOGGING from the Liberty Film Festival in Los Angeles.

X-PRIZE UPDATE: Another SpaceShipOne launch is scheduled for tomorrow. Burt Rutan seems unconcerned about the rolls on the last flight. I certainly hope he’s right, and that everything goes well.

DEBATE CHEATING? Drudge has video.

UPDATE: Meanwhile, this ought to be against the rules.

ANOTHER UPDATE: I should note that the cheating story was originally broken by INDCJournal and The Daily Recycler.

YET ANOTHER UPDATE: Heh.

MORE: Jim Geraghty doesn’t think it matters: “The predictable explosion of enthusiasm for Kerry and the optimism about his chances in the mainstream media will not be interrupted by a mere breaking of the debate rules.”

Not just predictable, I should note, but predicted. Meanwhile, reader Barry Dauphin sends a list. Click “read more” to read it.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Here’s a report that it was just a pen.

MORE: INDCJournal says it’s a pen, too, and adds: “The debate rules were violated in letter, but not intent, and any charges of cheating against the Kerry campaign are undeserved and inaccurate.”

(more…)

THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION HAS ENDED THE GENOCIDE IN DARFUR: Just a few weeks ago it was a massive humanitarian disaster. Then the United States condemned it, called it genocide, and threatened to act.

Result: There’s really no problem in Darfur at all! It’s all a fiction! The people in the camps are happy, and healthy, and grateful! Next we’ll hear that it’s all about oil, no doubt.

UPDATE: Rajan Rishyakaran is still posting the Sudan genocide roundup. Guess he hasn’t gotten the word that the whole thing’s just another neocon BushLied^TM plot.

ANOTHER UPDATE: On this turnabout, Inoperable Terran observes: “That would be hilarious if it weren’t so predictable.”

Er, yeah, and if people weren’t dying, and stuff. But I take the point.

TOM MAGUIRE HAS QUESTIONS about the “Global Test” approach and Israel.

UPDATE: Plus, Cheney-Edwards debate prep!

SISSY WILLIS:

The issues don’t change much from decade to decade, and it’s fascinating to watch how arguments pro or con a particular point go back and forth between parties depending upon the current occupant of the White House. One thing that has changed between those halcyon pre-chad, pre-9/11 days and our Fahrenheit 911/527’s/MoveOn, campaign-finance-reform-loophole era is the tenor of the debate. C-Span rebroadcast Cheney’s and Lieberman’s oh-so-civilized and — in Donald Rumsfeld’s term — helpful debate last night. Low key, measured and rational.

Things aren’t really that way now. Campaign finance “reform” has been enormously destructive to civil society, in my opinion.

IF YOU’RE NOT READING THE BELMONT CLUB, well, you should be.

UNSCAM UPDATE: The Times of London reports:

A LEAKED report has exposed the extent of alleged corruption in the United Nations’ oil-for-food scheme in Iraq, identifying up to 200 individuals and companies that made profits running into hundreds of millions of pounds from it. The report largely implicates France and Russia, whom Saddam Hussein targeted as he sought support on the UN Security Council before the Iraq war. Both countries were influential voices against UN-backed action.

A senior UN official responsible for the scheme is identified as a major beneficiary. The report, marked “highly confidential”, also finds that the private office of Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, profited from the cheap oil. Saddam’s regime awarded this oil during the run-up to the war when military action was being discussed at the UN.

The report was drawn up on behalf of the interim Iraqi government in preparation for a possible legal action against those who may have illicitly profited under Saddam. The Iraqis hired the London-based accountants KPMG and lawyers Freshfields to advise on future action.

It details a catalogue of alleged bribery and corruption perpetrated by Saddam under the UN programme, revealing how the regime lined its pockets and those of influential politicians, journalists and UN officials.

Not shocking to blogosphereans, of course, but still news. And certainly more support for this thesis.

And, of course, there’s more evidence here.

UPDATE: Thoughts on what this means for Kerry’s “global test” approach to diplomacy here.

I don’t think the “Global Test” approach is going to help him. Maybe he can fall back on Richard Holbrooke’s statement:

Asked what the Kerry Doctrine actually is, Holbrooke, in a conference call with reporters, replied: “There is no Kerry Doctrine.”

Or maybe not. . . .

THE GLOBAL TEST business seems to be catching on.

This one is still funnier, though.

AN INTERESTING ARTICLE IN WIRED NEWS on space warfare. And here’s a link to the Air Force paper on “counterspace warfare” that it references. (And read this article and this earlier Air Force paper too, if you’re really interested.)

Contrary to uninformed opinions expressed elsewhere, there’s nothing about space militarization or even warfare in space as such that violates international law. Whether these particular plans are good ones, however, is something I can’t venture an opinion on at this point. However, I’m writing an article on new developments in space law for the Chicago Journal of International Law later this fall, and I’m sure I’ll arrive at an opinion before I’m done.

UPDATE: Here’s a very recent Congressional Research Service report on military space issues.

SOME OBSERVATIONS on allies and military spending. More here.

AN INTERESTING REPORT FROM AFGHANISTAN, by Radek Sikorski.

TOM BROKAW defends Dan Rather, compares bloggers to jihadists, and observes: “I don’t think you ever judge a man by only one event in his career.”

Yeah, I’ve noticed Brokaw, et al., not doing that.

UPDATE: D’oh! It was Peter Jennings with the quoted statement — Brokaw was the one making the jihad comparison. Sorry. I think the point still holds, though.

WATERGATE WEST? It seems to be a season of dirty tricks.

HUGH HEWITT is conducting a virtual symposium on bunker-busting nukes.

THUNE 50, DASCHLE 46: This can’t be making the Daschle camp happy.

UPDATE: RealClearPolitics shows Kerry up in several polls. This can’t be making the Bush camp happy.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Some thoughts on the Bush / Kerry polls at Power Line. “We knew this was coming; the media story line for the next 30 days is Kerry’s comeback, which has the effect of wiping the slate clean and avoiding discussion of how he got behind in the first place. Is the comeback real? Rasmussen shows the President continuing to enjoy a three-point lead. Among his respondents, 6% say they changed their vote as a result of the debate–3% now voting for Kerry, 2% for Bush, and one percent now undecided.”

I await comments from the poll experts.

YET ANOTHER UPDATE: More here and here.