NYT tweeted Hobby Lobby ruling 41 minutes after SCOTUSblog
In a remarkable display of caution lasting eons in Twitter time, The New York Times waited about 40 minutes after the news broke to post the Supreme Court's ruling [PDF] on whether some companies can be required to pay for contraception.
Within five minutes, the Associated Press and Wall Street Journal had also tweeted the news, but the Times would say only that the court had ruled on the case without going into specifics:
That bit of non-news included a disclaimer explaining why the Times wasn't yet telling readers what everyone else was telling them:
Earlier, the Times told readers of The Caucus blog to expect delays as reporters and editors ensure they fully understand the decision. The explanation alluded to the embarrassment some news organizations felt two years ago when they jumped the gun and misinterpreted the Supreme Court's ruling on the health care law (the Times got it right in 2012, tweeting the news 10 minutes after SCOTUSblog did):
We realize that people will be eager to know what the ruling means as soon as it is released (and you can read the decision yourself when it is posted on the court’s website). But we also want to point out that the immediate descriptions of any ruling may not be very meaningful, because the ruling could be complicated, as it was with last year’s ruling on same-sex marriage, and on health care the year before, and not amenable to instant summarizing.
The moment that we feel comfortable reporting a ruling’s basic meaning, which could be almost immediately, we plan to explain the decision.
Apparently that moment came about 40 minutes after SCOTUSblog was comfortable posting the news — and more than 35 minutes after AP and The Wall Street Journal were.
The only potential inaccuracy in the Times's tweet, as far as I can see: the claim that the news was truly "breaking" anymore.