...And The Retractions Begin...

After ABC News first broadcast a grainy, low resolution version of George Zimmerman's arrival at the Sanford Police Department and claimed it showed that Zimmerman had no injuries and therefore  his story about being attacked by TrayVon Martin was fabricated, Dan Riehl and others used that same grainy video to show you can see a bloody gash on the back of Zimmerman's head:

http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2012/03/enhanced-image-proves-abc-blew-it-on-zimmerman-video.html


Dan Riehl put that post up on his site, Riehl World View on March 29th at 12:30 pm. He also put up a post about it at Breitbart.com: 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/30/New-Video-of-George-Zimmerman-Casts-Doubt-on-ABC-Report


Others in the Conservative Blogosphere spread this all over the internet.  Then on April 1st a much better resolution version of the same video was made available to the media.  

MSNBC was the first to issue a retraction, admitting that the new video shows a bloody gash on the back of Zimmerman's head: 

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/03/31/MSNBC-Admits-Zimmerman-Head-Injury


And today ABC News followed suit: 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/04/02/hd-zimmerman-head-gash-abc


This makes twice in one week the Old Media was scooped/forced to retract by the New Media, first on MSNBC/NBC New's deceptive editing of Zimmerman's 911 call to make him look like a racist, and now on the Sanford PD video that supposedly showed Zimmerman had no injuries.  


If this narrative of Zimmerman being a racist who stalked and cold bloodedly shot Martin could stand on it's own, why does the Old Media feel compelled to distort transcripts and audio tapes?  Or be so quick to issue pronouncements doubting Zimmerman's story based on a grainy low resolution video they are then forced to retract when a clearer video comes out?