N.Y. Times writer protested at event, then wrote about it

WorldNetDaily ^ | May 23, 2005 | WND

[andyk]

3,200 corrections! Of course, you probably couldn't find them if you wanted, but they're in there somewhere...

[dirtboy]

The writer says she was unaware of these policies

That's perfectly understandable, IMO. She's probably read hundreds of Times articles where the reporter injected his bias into the story. Why should her case be any different?

[palmer]

They have gone from making up news to making news.

[wvobiwan]

Bill Keller, the executive editor who charged the panel with the study said there was "an immense amount that we can do to improve our journalism."

Ummm, yes, I have an idea? Watch Fox New to get an idea of what fair and balanced means. Immitate.

You'll be fine.

[Elpasser]

The MSM just keeps getting embarrassed by its own agenda-driven, ethics-be-damned, approach.

Don't suppose they have enough shame to ever change.

[andyk]

Yep. She was just following SOP, no doubt.

[ken21]

she was just doing what she was trained to do in feminist and "critical theory" courses at the university!

[Archon of the East]

Wow, I'm shocked, just shocked that a princeton grad and activist would feel so comfortable presenting a story with a conflict of interest at that piece of trash paper. I mean they have such high standards. Somebody please tell me the date when activism became a substitute for intellect.

[ken5050]

This Sunday, in his final column as NY Times ombudsman, Okreant listed the things he was sorry he couldn't do. One of them was to get Paul Krugman to stop skewing his numbers..

[IllumiNaughtyByNature]

3200 errors last year! That's almost 8 1/2 per day! Read that birdcager liner at your own risk!

[randog]

The Times said it "does not ordinarily allow its writers to cover events in which they have taken part, and the paper's staff and contributors are not permitted to join rallies or demonstrations on divisive issues.

Right. Did you know that Chris Hedges, the NYT War Correspondent, is a self-proclaimed "anti-war activist"?

[kabar]

And the correction was buried in the Saturday edition.

[Enchante]

"The writer says she was unaware of these policies"


Ignorance of the law is no excuse! Or in this case, ignorance of elementary ethics and professionalism. Almost anyone but a NY Times reporter or a Princeton student would know it is COMMON SENSE that it is an unethical conflict of interest to report upon a political demonstration/protest in which one is a participant. Let's put it in terms that these left-wing bozos might understand: should Enron executives be allowed to write the stories covering their own misdeeds? But the left is always so smug, so sanctimonious, so convinced they are a gift to us all that they cannot recognize their own depraved lack of ethics.

[Ditto]

IMHO, The NY Times is a perfectly fine publication --- in fact, one of the best --- as long as you are not interested in news. They do great stuff on entertainment, fashion, sports, classified --- all that stuff which is the only reason regular people every buy the "paper" --- that and puppy training. They don't buy it for "news." By the time it's printed and distributed, people who are really interested in news already have it.

Hell, they just can't do news very well and haven't been able to for many years and everyone knows it. Every competitor they have kicks their butt in news reporting. If they just stopped trying to be a newspaper, they would be fine.

[dhs12345]

Actually, the funny part is where the NYT try to act like they are shocked that this might happen.

"...coverage of religion in America and more reporting from rural areas of the country..."

LOL!

They don't get it. The time when it was cool to dump all over conservative, white, males is over. IMO, religion in a newspaper is not what we need. Sort like pandering.

And sending the same, unchanged, paper to rural areas is not going to solve their fundamental problem.

They are on the right road -- first step: acknowledge that you have a problem.

[mmercier]

These MSM nitwits are getting picked-off about one a week lately. Look for this trend to accelerate, as it is a self feeding phenomena.

[Enchante]

Those are just the ones they admit to!!
And of course any retractions they print are half-hearted, inadequate, and buried in a small space on an inner page. A rule of journalistic ethics should be that any correction or retraction must run in a story AT LEAST as prominent as the original.... otherwise, we have what is currently the case, the LSM organs such as the NY Times run their leftist errors in front page stories and their grudging corrections in small items on an inside page. Guess which has more impact?

[andyk]

Yep, Saturday - two weeks after the original article ran!

Check out their online correction.

[andyk]

so convinced they are a gift to us all

One might say they're the gift that keeps on giving...

[Zero Sum]

IMHO, The NY Times is a perfectly fine publication --- in fact, one of the best --- as long as you are not interested in news.

Well said.