So, when are Bristol and Levi getting married?

Sarah Baxter writes in the London Times:

In an election campaign notable for its surprises, Sarah Palin, the Republican vice- presidential candidate, may be about to spring a new one—the wedding of her pregnant teenage daughter to her ice-hockey-playing fiancé before the November 4 election.

But there’s nothing there. The article does not provide a single fact or factoid indicating that Palin is about to announce a date for her daughter’s wedding. It quotes speculation by unnamed persons in the McCain campaign to the effect that wouldn’t it be cool if Bristol and Levi got married before the election.

UPDATE (September 29)

Robert J. writes :

I’ve poked around too. Scores and scores of articles and re-quotes, but all roads lead back to Murdock’s London Times, which ordinarily would not be an overtly suspect source. No denials either, but that is not surprising in itself. (I actually found some reportage from early September about McCain quiping that the wedding would be held in the White House post-election.)

LA replies:

Remarkable. Thanks for checking that out. So this is an example of a news story being reported and spread around the world on the basis of a complete absence of any facts supporting the news, with no one pointing out that there’s no there there. Each news organ repeats the same vague phrases from the Times story which lead the average, casual reader to believe that there’s a wedding in the works, when all that’s actually been said is that some people who have a political interest in a wedding taking place, but who have no connection with the family, would LIKE to see a wedding take place.

But of course it’s not just your average inattentive reader who falls for it; it’s all the editors who have been spreading the story who are falling for it.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at September 28, 2008 05:50 PM | Send