on the ‘Mummy’ and ‘Dracula’ stories article article A New Yorker article on a story that may or may not be true.
A story that is true.
A story that’s been reported by other outlets.
A rumor or fiction that was first reported by the Associated Press.
A new story that might or might not be accurate.
The Associated Press and The New York Journal of Medicine are two of the media organizations that have been the most outspoken critics of the claims in the ‘Draco’ stories.
The AP, for instance, said in a statement that it had “no evidence” that the story in the book was accurate and that the AP’s editors were considering “reviewing this matter as part of our journalism ethics.”
And the Journal, which has a strong journalistic tradition and is a major source for news about scientific issues, also issued a statement saying that “we have no record” of any such investigation.
The AP, the Journal and other media outlets have long questioned the veracity of the book and the stories about it, including a recent analysis of the content of the published book that found that the book’s author had never worked on a scientific paper, and that he had never received a grant to conduct a study on his ideas.
The study was based on a single anonymous manuscript.
A number of authors and publishers have expressed their skepticism about the claims, and in December, the AP retracted an article that had appeared online and in print in the New York magazine that included the claim.
But the AP said it was still publishing the article, despite the AP editors’ decision not to publish it, citing a desire to protect the integrity of the journal.
In a letter to the AP, a spokesperson for the AP also wrote that the magazine was considering taking down the article in light of its “significant factual inaccuracies.”
“We are in the process of reopening the article and publishing an updated version,” the AP wrote.
“The fact that the article was not retracted was not in dispute.
As we noted, it was widely reported that the paper was not peer reviewed.
The fact that it did not have a peer-reviewed paper does not mean that the conclusions reached are not accurate.”
The AP also noted that the editors of the New Yorker, which first reported the claims on Friday, have already considered whether to pull the article from its website.