On December 28, the New York Times front page included an article entitled "As a Candidate, Kennedy is Eloquent but Elusive". The online article linked to a 49-second audio clip in which Caroline Kennedy used the phrase "you know" 12 times. (Here's the complete transcript of the interview.) Later, the NYT quietly changed the online headline to "Forceful but Elusive". They also changed the word "eloquent" in the text of the article to "forceful" (link to altered article).
There is so much to say about this: What is the NYT doing changing the substance of articles without a correction notice? How in the world can this inexperienced society person be a serious contender for the US senate without an election? Are the authors and editors at the NYT in the pockets of the Kennedys?
The ever-delightful commenters at Gawker decided to start a game of MadLibs: Fill in the blank in "As a Candidate, Caroline Kennedy is ______ but Elusive." Some of the suggestions to date:
As a Candidate, Kennedy is Famous but Elusive
As a candidate, Kennedy is a frackin' actual living Kennedy and that should be enough, right? but elusive
As a Candidate, Kennedy Is, You Know, but Elusive
As a Candidate, Kennedy is Imperial and Eager to Ignore Your Questions (To Be Submitted In Writing 4 Weeks Prior) but Elusive
Elitist but Elusive
Incoherent but Elusive
Bland but Elusive
Well-Funded but Elusive
Inexperienced but Elusive
Parochial but Elusive
As a Candidate, Kennedy Is Confused and Off-putting
As a Candidate, Kennedy Is Incoherent and Elusive
As a Candidate, Kennedy Is Snarky and Elusive
As a Candidate, Kennedy Is Verbose but Elusive
As a Candidate, Kennedy Is Arrogant but Elusive
As a Candidate, Kennedy Is Obtrusive but Elusive
Her eloquence is elusive.
Strangely Palin-esque but elusive.