I don't know. What prevents people from purposely foreshadowing? Like, I was looking at a millennium terror alert article in Time, and Bin Laden was only one of eight people to be afraid of. A "Supplementary" Wikinews could put much greater evidence on him, giving bias to the then distant future of 2001.
<br><br>Or if I were to report on the release of the Massey Commission ( <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massey_Commission">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massey_Commission</a> ), what's to stop me from focusing the serious and still relevant report up for laughs, by highlighting the newspaper industry's fear of facsimile machines cutting into their profits? This was not the highlight of the report, yet to a modern nerd, it very well might be.
<br><br>Nick<br><br><br>&quot;The vigorous brief of the Canadian Daily Newspapers Association was
devoted entirely to a discussion of the consequences to the present
newspaper business if the new device of facsimile broadcasting should
become, as seems possible, an effective and popular rival to newspapers
as we know them. We can claim only an imperfect knowledge of this new
medium of communication. In brief, as we understand it, this process
can deliver directly into the home a printed newspaper as readily and
by essentially the same means as radio and television are now received.
No printing machinery or delivery services are needed, and any radio
station could go into the newspaper business for a small fraction of
the investment required to establish a normal newspaper. The Canadian
Daily Newspapers Association states that this development will attract
newcomers to the newspaper field, and that the facsimile reader will be
able in his home to dial any one of several newspapers just as now he
tunes his receiving set to radio programmes.&quot;<br><br><a href="http://www.collectionscanada.ca/massey/h5-412-e.html">http://www.collectionscanada.ca/massey/h5-412-e.html</a><br>