The Politico wrote a story today originally stating that Hillary Clinton won the Pennsylvania primary by 10 points, but has since downgraded that number to 9.

Why you might ask? Because of reader backlash. Numerous commenters on the story noted that Clinton did not win by 10 points. She has in fact won by a little more than 9 points, and if one wants to round that number, it should be rounded down, not up like most media outlets have been doing (as I noted yesterday).

Good for the Politico. It’s good to see that A) writers at the Politico actually read comments on their stories (I don’t think the MSM can say the same) and B) that readers comments/suggestions are actually taken to heart.

I can understand how someone might be confused into thinking that Clinton won by 10 points when the majority of the mainstream media and pundents have been trumpeting her double-digit, 10-point victory. That supposed “double-digit” victory only comes when one uses creative math. But it’s refreshing to see the Politico realize that it made a mistake and correct itself.

This whole affair shows how shallow and corporate much of the MSM is. The difference between a 9 or 10 point victory doesn’t mean much when it comes to delegates, which are ultimately what matter. But that 1 point difference is the difference between a single digit and a double digit victory. Many media members are trying to up sell this story so they can make more money.

Many people have noted that Clinton mathematically doesn’t have much a chance of beating Barack Obama. But that doesn’t sell papers and grab viewers, now does it?