I've seen that occur in the past. Usually, the reason is that the article was written by the other paper and they are allowed to share it for a certain period of time, but then it reverts back to the paper that originated it, so that they can continue to generate web traffic for those specifically looking for that article. It's stupid, yes.
Here's the link to the Washington Post version of it. You need to register with them to view it, but it's free:
Comments
It says it's still available at the Washington Post
Submitted on April 14th, 2008 by DebbieKatI've seen that occur in the past. Usually, the reason is that the article was written by the other paper and they are allowed to share it for a certain period of time, but then it reverts back to the paper that originated it, so that they can continue to generate web traffic for those specifically looking for that article. It's stupid, yes.
Here's the link to the Washington Post version of it. You need to register with them to view it, but it's free:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/10/AR200804...
It was taken down (I wonder
Submitted on April 13th, 2008 by Gooze_OneIt was taken down (I wonder why *rolls eyes*)
It is however still on google cache.
(page 1)
http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:7ySTJd94WDMJ:www.msnbc.msn.com/id/2...
(page 2)
http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:xcN4o-9DuqgJ:www.msnbc.msn.com/id/2...
(page 3)
http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:EIASfBJtgNAJ:www.msnbc.msn.com/id/2...