There's a way to add context to your blog post. The "delete" key is not it.

The libelous snakepit known as Twitter was ablaze Tuesday with condemnation of Minnesota Vikings superstar Adrian Peterson, who likened soon-to-be-locked-out players to slaves.

REUTERS/Eric Miller

Adrian Peterson

It's the sort of quote that got Timberwolf Latrell "Family to feed" Sprewell run out of town, and an utterance many sportswriters would kill to get. But instead, Yahoo Sports reporter Doug Farrar killed the quote — personally removing it from his story after it was published. That turned the condemnation on him.

Farrar, an apparently experienced reporter with a perch at the Washington Post, later admitted the move made him look like he was "in the bag" for the Viking All-Pro, especially since no one disputed the quote's accuracy or that it was on the record.

After about three hours as a social networking tackling dummy, Farrar restored Peterson's comment. The writer later explained to WCCO Radio's Michele Tafoya that he wanted "context from Peterson’s people, through the p.r. firm."

Oy. In the interview, Farrar came off like a genuinely thoughtful guy, though one in need of backbone replacement. The thing is, the original quote contains a lot of context — Peterson is obviously aware that multi-millonaires aren't cotton-pickers. Here's the quote:

AP: It's modern-day slavery, you know? People kind of laugh at that, but there are people working at regular jobs who get treated the same way, too. With all the money … the owners are trying to get a different percentage, and bring in more money. I understand that; these are business-minded people. Of course this is what they are going to want to do. I understand that; it's how they got to where they are now. But as players, we have to stand our ground and say, 'Hey — without us, there's no football.' There are so many different perspectives from different players, and obviously we're not all on the same page — I don't know. I don't really see this going to where we'll be without football for a long time; there's too much money lost for the owners. Eventually, I feel that we'll get something done.

Most of us have written posts that, upon hitting "send," we wish had more context. Unfortunately, I think Farrar's original instinct wasn't to add depth to his piece, but protect the football player's reputation. That's the p.r. firm's job. At least make the flacks pick up the phone.

If you're compelled to reconsider, the wise thing to do is post an update separately, add a link in the original post directing readers to it, but don't consign the tough stuff to the memory hole.

Farrar, at least, seems to have learned the lesson. Here's the pertinent transcript from Tafoya's interview:

It was up for about two minutes, and it hit Twitter. And you know how things hit Twitter. My first thought was — and I think in retrospect, it was on me, that my mistake was to take it down at all. I should have left it up, and still asked for context from Peterson’s people, through the p.r. firm. I didn’t hear anything back after about three hours, and it got to the point where my journalistic integrity is in question and people think I’m in the bag for Adrian Peterson because I took the quote off.

I had to put it back on, because it’s what he said, it’s what he intended to say, and it wasn’t off the record. As much as you don’t want to see a guy just walking into the woodchopper at a certain point, the quote had to go back in the piece. In retrospect, it never should have left the piece.