Over the last several days — June 1 through June 13, 2026 — I have highlighted examples where the daily paper (theBigMetalShedontheHill) engaged in what I describe as selective fact reporting. By that, I mean reporting that leaves out key facts that provide necessary context for readers.
Yesterday, however, in my view, it moved beyond selective facts.
Before 7:00 a.m., I responded publicly with this reel calling attention to what I believed was inaccurate reporting. Sometime around 10:45 a.m., the online story was updated (screenshots retained by me). Online updates can quietly replace prior versions, but printed newspapers remain a permanent record.
I have since been told that the reporter informed at least one individual that a correction would be made.
That raises a larger question:
If a publication presents selective facts — or publishes information later determined to be inaccurate — should the correction be given the same prominence and visibility as the original story?
Too often, corrections appear buried, while the original headline, accusation, or impression receives the widest audience.
Having been involved in political activity for more than 40 years, I have personally experienced selective reporting and outright inaccuracies. That experience was part of what led to the launch of BrianHornback.com and later TheMegaBullhornofTruth.com more than two decades ago.
Over time, I have observed that some reporters rely heavily on selective facts or narratives supplied by political opponents rather than independently verifying information and presenting complete context.
One example that comes to mind involves Sean Murphy. Before many in the Town of Farragut community knew who he was, articles circulated containing salacious allegations. According to email records obtained through open records requests, then-Alderman Louise Povlin sent links containing those allegations to a media contact. The concern raised was whether those claims were fully verified and whether readers were given the complete outcome and context.
The public deserves reporting that is complete, fair, and accountable — and when mistakes happen, corrections should be impossible to miss.
BTW, four years ago, both Mayor Williams and Bill Johns were sponsors on BrianHornback.com, the race was won by less than 60 votes. Alderman Cain is a sponsor here and in my opinion, could have been the motivation for the daily paper to go digging in the dumpster. Cause the facts were the same two years ago, when Cain was elected Alderman and the daily paper was clueless or didn’t think it was an issue.
