Furthermore, many people bring up the BBC and NYT edits to the George Bush page. While the BBC editing “wanker” or the NYT editing “jerk jerk jerk” into George Bush's profile is unbecoming, it is not a gross violation of journalistic ethics. It may be a violation of professional ethics, but not journalistic ones - the key being that those edits were designed to insult and not designed to smear (to present a skewed negative opinion or falsehood that sounds credible as a matter of fact) or to obscure (to attempt to remove information from the public record). No one believes that George Bush's middle name is Wanker, and “jerk jerk jerk” isn't even a complete sentence. On the other hand, the Fox News edits were much subtler and went beyond name calling into misinforming, misleading, or obscuring the facts to make it's own self look better compared to it's rivals. That is the exact opposite of what a news organization should do, and that's why I feel that these edits are particularly odious. Your opinion may vary, especially if you believe that civility is a higher good than veracity in a news organization; still, there is no attempt to “ignore” the other half of the story because the other half of the story has - like this half - been covered endlessly.