The J.F.K. Airport Bomb Plot (NY Times defends their page A30 story placement)

The New York Times ^ | June 4, 2007 | Suzanne Daley

[FreedomPoster]

The writer is the NY Times' national editor, answering a number of reader questions.

Because the NY Times already knew everything there was to know about this plot, very quickly, they determined it wasn't important.

[Clara Lou]

Some of what’s wrong with this bill:

1) Taxpayers will pay for the immigration lawyers for illegal aliens if working in agriculture.

2) Illegal aliens would be given legal status just one day after their application is filed even if a background check is not completed.

3) Gang members are eligible for amnesty if they renounce their gang status.

4) Borders do not have to be secure before the amnesty program begins.

5) $2,600,000,000,000 — That is the cost the Heritage Foundation estimates to cover the retirement benefits of 12,000,000 illegal aliens if this amnesty bill becomes law.

[sono]

Stockholders of NYT must be so proud.

[AlaskaErik]

The fact that they feel it necessary to defend the placement of the article shows me they know they screwed up.

[Clara Lou]

Post #2 is on the wrong thread. It’s what happens when I have two windows open. ~sigh~
Sorry.

[theDentist]

No wonder the Old Grey Lady is Dead.... ignorant editors, gutless reporters, and none of them in touch with society.

[300magnum]

Hey, hey now. No thread hijacking.

[johnny7]

“In truth, the decision was widely debated even within this newsroom. At the front page meeting this morning, we took an informal poll... ”

“In truth... ” don't make me puke!

[Alberta's Child]

I don’t know what the big deal is about this. Anyone who reads the NY Times for their news is probably a loser anyway — and probably has no interest in “news,” either.

[Savage Beast]

Lesson: If you want to know what's going on, don't read the New York Times.

[ClearCase_guy]

they know they screwed up.

And they are fully prepared to do so again.

[MizSterious]

What does your post have to do with the NYT’s coverage (or lack of) of the JFK airport plot?

[winner3000]

(In truth, the decision was widely debated even within this newsroom.)

That’s obvious BS. If the decision was so close, why didn’t they put the story in A2 instead of deep within the paper? Actions speak louder than words: they wanted to burry the story pure and simple.

[NavyCanDo]

Its a no brainer why it made page 30. The story fell on the same day Paris Hilton was sent to jail. sarc...

[billbears]

The plotters had yet to lay out plans. They had no financing. Nor did they have any explosives.

Within a day the complaint with much of the information had been released to the public. They probably had it the same day and reviewed it. One of the guys was homeless. So yes, the NYT was probably correct in this situation. It was news, but then again it wasn't really news was it? It was not plausible and they didn't even have the means to carry it out.

I expect after the ridiculous pizza boy terrorist 'threat', they're more cautious about putting inflammatory headlines on the front page

[The_Reader_David]

The defense of the the story placement would have been adequate if it had been placed in a prominent place somewhere in pages A2-4 with a little lead in the box on page A-1 that points to important stories not starting on A-1. Even then it would have been poor editorial judgement, not blameworthy, just poor.

A30 was a deliberate attempt to bury it.

[andy58-in-nh]

The Times is a fundamentally dishonest newspaper whose editors are committed to the cause of harassing, embarrassing, and denigrating the present Administration, regardless of news judgment. Does anyone doubt that if the present plotters had in time obtained financing and explosives and executed their plans, the Times would have devoted a scathing 12-part series to the failure of the Bush Administration to stop it?

[dayglored]

> ...the NYT was probably correct in this situation. It was news, but then again it wasn't really news was it? It was not plausible and they didn't even have the means to carry it out.

Sure, but you're being logical. That doesn't stop folks here from having a good time jumping up and down about it.

I don't read the NYT, so I don't know the answer to this, but here's a question: was page A30 the -last- page of the A-section (i.e. on the back) that day? If so, it's the next-most read page, after the front page...

[MizSterious]

Yes, and of course we ALL know that Atta and his merry band were just a bunch of drunks at a stripper bar on 9/10/2001. Dupes and dufuses, yes, some were, but look what they did. NOT apprehending this bunch would have been very foolish, and to insist it isn’t really “news” is even more so.

[Arrowhead1952]

I don't remember what page this was on in the Austin Un American Non Statesman, but I am ready to cancel my subscription. They ran the William Jefferson (D) Lousiana, on page A-9 or A-11.

The same day, they had a cartoon by Ben Uber-Liberal Sergeant, that had the devil going into the VP's quarters. That was his contribution to the article about the President and VP to keep the visitor registers secret.