Was Verge trying to save face?

The day of the boston marathon bombing, I noticed that Verge released an article questing the legality of shutting down wireless networks during an emergency. To be fair, I never read the article. However, today I was browsing Ars Technica and encountered an article clarifying that media outlets incorrectly reported the shut down of wireless networks. I recalled Verge's post on this matter and decided to read it. It was interesting to read that the article was written as if Chris Zeigler's original draft correctly reported that wireless networks were never disrupted. The posted time date was on April 15th.

Reading the comments however, it's clear that the original article was indeed incorrect, seeing as the first comment was written as if it were disputing the claims of the original article: "For what it’s worth, Verizon is denying that there was ever a request to shut down the network." I find it discomforting that Chris Zeigler and Verge never provided an "update" to the article that I've seen often times in other articles and on other sites. Instead, they opted to edit the article and not mention that it was revised from the time it was originally posted.

It seems like Verge and/or Chris is simply trying to hide the fact that they made a mistake in posting the article. This is confusing to readers and commenters when stories are revised without indication. I hope Verge does not do this again.