Tuesday, September 26, 2006


The New York Times claims Iraq War worsens threat of Terrorism.

It really seems a shame when something of this importance is clouded with controversy over bias. And it is a shame the New York Times does not follow the standards of the Los Angeles Times which are based on the code of ethics of the American Society of Newspaper Editors.

The LA Times standard says that anonymous sources will be used as a last resort.
Our first amendment protected us against the hiding from the public all facets of a news story. We should be given reliable information from reputable sources that are disclosed and we should be given all facts and information supporting all sides of a story. The New York Times seems to be silent on this issue. If they had refused an unconfirmed story would someone have gone public? Or if they pressured the President would he have released the story? We already have a call for an investigation in Congress and that will slow down other legislation.

I remember when I was attending a very competent school and starting to learn to write term papers and articles. I used what I thought was a highly regarded source (almost 60 years ago) the New York Times. But my professor made an example of my poor choice before the class and I learned the importance of going to source documents, not articles in newspapers for an acceptable dissertation. Scholars with higher degrees know they do not advance if they do not use documented references.

The New York Times has published an article that is based on the anonymous comments of a dozen people. No confirmation of anyone for the record.
Our courts will not accept testimony unless it is from a witness directly.
The New York Times will accept unsubstantiated tips which places doubt in our minds as to the motives of the Times and their tipsters.

Already we are hearing that the information was based on only a part of the report referred to. We know the Times has been reported to be biased against the administration and Washington DC is reported to lean in thought against the current administration. In particular, there are strong feelings in part of the intelligence community. An NIC report before the Iraq war started predicted the possibility of an increase in terrorism and possibly the intelligence community is anxious to say we told you so!

The press is given strong powers of access and freedom but what standards must the press follow to retain those privileges? I have explained some issues in greater depth and you will find these comments if you click here.

No comments: