Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Reading Between the Lies (Time Magazine on Jayson Blair and The New York Times)
Time ^ | May 19, 2003 | Nancy Gibbs

Posted on 05/11/2003 3:52:11 PM PDT by Timesink

Sunday, May. 11, 2003

Reading Between the Lies

A young reporter who stole and made up stories forces the New York Times to take stock

By NANCY GIBBS


DOUG MILLS/AP
A police car at the scene of a sniper shooting in Falls Church, Va. October 2002
Given the chance, Macarena Hernandez might have done great things at the New York Times. With a gift for detail and musical prose, she was offered a job after working as a summer intern in 1998 and planned to take it — right up until the day that August when her father, a construction worker, was killed by an 18-wheeler. Her mother needed her, and so Hernandez went home to Texas. With no journalism jobs in sight, she began teaching English to mostly poor Mexican-American kids at her old high school. She urged them to follow their dreams.

One of her fellow interns that summer, Jayson Blair, was also talented and ambitious, and quite a bit luckier. Despite some reprimands for sloppy reporting — like missing the fact that a murder victim was not shot but strangled — he rose fast at the Times, made friends, wooed mentors and eventually got sent to Washington to join the team covering the hunt for the Beltway sniper. There he brought glory to the paper with front-page scoops that left rivals shaking their heads in wonder — and disbelief.

This spring, when he began writing about the families of soldiers who died fighting in Iraq, Blair and Hernandez crossed paths again. Now 28, she had found a job at the San Antonio Express-News; on April 18 the paper published her story about Juanita Anguiano, the mother of a missing soldier from Los Fresnos, Texas. Blair's article about Anguiano landed on the front page of the Times eight days later. Both were moving, vivid portraits of a mother's love and loss. But only one was original. "He stole her story," says Express-News editor Robert Rivard, who wrote to Howell Raines, executive editor of the New York Times, asking him to look into the matter.

Which is how it came to pass that Raines returned early from his honeymoon, Blair resigned, and the country's most prestigious newspaper found itself answering ever sharper questions about just who Jayson Blair was, how much of the material in his 700 or so Times stories over the past five years was made up and what the paper of record was going to do to correct that record. As soon as national editor Jim Roberts began calling sources in some of Blair's pieces, says Raines, "in every case ... there was an apparent falsification."

In the belief that "the proper response to bad journalism is to do good journalism," Raines assigned three editors and five reporters to re-report Blair's suspicious stories and comb through his computer files and expense accounts. The result was a 7,200-word story on last Sunday morning's front page that autopsied what it called a "low point in the 152-year history of the newspaper." According to the Times's investigation, Blair "fabricated comments. He concocted scenes. He stole material from other newspapers and wire services." He described the houses of grieving parents he never visited, the nightmares of wounded soldiers who deny discussing them, the tears of people who seldom cry. "It's a huge black eye," said publisher Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr., whose family has controlled the paper since 1896.

The revelations gave the Times a hard shove into the company of the nation's other great but occasionally humbled papers: the Boston Globe, whose columnists Mike Barnicle and Patricia Smith resigned in 1998 after charges of serial plagiarism; the Wall Street Journal, whose financial columnist R. Foster Winans was convicted on 59 counts of conspiracy and fraud in 1985 for using his articles to make money in the stock market; and the Washington Post, which had to return the 1981 Pulitzer Prize won by reporter Janet Cooke for the haunting story of Jimmy, the 8-year-old heroin addict who turned out to be nothing more than a ghost from her typewriter.

Like every other news organization, the Times has had its share of embarrassments, but it also has a custom of obsessively addressing them in a corrections section on page 2 that is so meticulous about the smallest mistakes that it suggests the paper would never make any big ones. Any reporter with a 5% or 6% correction rate, says Raines, comes under scrutiny; the Times found 36 errors in the 73 articles Blair wrote between October and the end of April. Some of the editors who suspected his methods were reluctant to condemn him. Others neglected to share their concerns, or their warnings just got lost.

Despite accuracy issues from his earliest days, Blair was promoted in 2001 to full staff reporter, only to have his correction rate leap over the eight months following 9/11. (He claimed that a cousin died in the attacks; tracked down last week by the Times, the family denied that Blair was related.) According to metro editor Jonathan Landman's year-end summation, Blair made three times as many mistakes as the next-highest offender. "It alarmed everyone," says Raines, "and it should have."

The following April, the Times article reveals, Landman e-mailed other editors, saying "We have to stop Jayson from writing for the Times. Right now." Officially warned that he could be fired, Blair took a brief leave of absence; when he returned, he was watched more closely, and his correction rate improved dramatically enough to win him deployment on the sniper case. "Jayson had problems that were monitored aggressively," Raines says, "and in our view we tried to manage what problems we had. You don't stigmatize someone and tell them they can't do journalism or get a chance to show they can do stories of consequence."

Blair knew Washington from his days at the University of Maryland and a stint working there for the Boston Globe, so he joined the seven other Times reporters on the story. "Lots of people were told to break news, but he wasn't one of them," says one Times source. "He was supposed to baby-sit the police headquarters and go to the press conferences, not break news." But that changed after Blair caught fire: newsrooms in New York City and Washington fizzed each time he tossed a new scoop on the table — the grape stem found at a murder scene with suspect Lee Boyd Malvo's DNA on it, his supposed videotaped confession. Some of Blair's colleagues argue that the competitive passion that has driven some of the paper's recent triumphs, particularly its coverage of 9/11, may also have left the impression on an impressionable reporter that getting beat is worse than getting it wrong. "The story gets handed to anybody who gets hot," says one. "There's no talk about 'Make sure it's fair, make sure it's right.'" But the idea that competitive pressures somehow created Blair's deceptions is a charge Raines flatly rejects: "To suggest that this pathology seems to be a response to the stress of journalism is unfair to the 375 reporters and editors who work under the exact same circumstances and don't lie."

Whether or not this is a scandal born of ambition, it is also being cast as a story about race. Publications like the Times work hard to find and keep the best black reporters. That sometimes involves hiring minority reporters whose experience was "significantly below what we'd normally require because we wanted a lot of minority reporters," says one Times senior manager, who notes that a special training program helps bring young reporters up to speed. As Blair's record came to light, some colleagues concluded that he got second chances that others might not have. But others deny that race ensured Blair's rise or delayed his fall. He is variously described as charming and cunning, ambitious and lazy. "He was a picture of affability; he had a big hello for everyone. He was a hell of a fun, nice guy," says one colleague. "Most people rooted for him, most people were thrilled by his success, and now people are heartbroken."

Journalism may worship truth, but it is built on trust, and honest editors will admit, as Raines has, that a determined and creative liar is hard to catch. The Times will remember this catastrophe for a long time but will, in all likelihood, not suffer much for it. Blair's suffering, however, may have just begun. Upon resigning, he told the Associated Press, "I have been struggling with recurring personal issues, which have caused me great pain. I am now seeking appropriate counseling."

Reported by Jodie Morse/New York, Cathy Booth Thomas/Dallas and Viveca Novak/Washington


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia; US: Maryland; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: ccrm; corrupt; ethics; falsification; howellraines; jaysonblair; journalists; lamestreammedia; liar; malvo; newyorktimes; ordsblair; plagiarism; presstitutes; thenewyorktimes; unethical
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last
And check out this week's cover!


1 posted on 05/11/2003 3:52:11 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *CCRM; *Lamestream Media; *Presstitutes; MEDIANEWS; martin_fierro; reformed_democrat; Loyalist
This is the New York Times Schadenfreude Ping List. Freepmail me to be added or dropped.
2 posted on 05/11/2003 3:53:35 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
How to fix it? Simple - vote for the most conservative, Constitutionally oriented person in the race.

It works for everything from the dog catcher position to the White House.
3 posted on 05/11/2003 4:02:24 PM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon liberty, it is essential to examine principles - -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
Did Jayson Blair have a personal relationship with someone important at The New York Times?
4 posted on 05/11/2003 4:03:13 PM PDT by Grand Old Partisan (You can read about my history of the GOP at www.republicanbasics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
Reading the ten page Times piece on this Jayson Blair I was struck by what a circus the Times newsroom(s) seemed to be. This guy got away with serial murder professionally. And the many claims that race had nothing to do with Blair being kept on long after others would have been shown the door are simply laughable, ROTFLMAO-laughable.
Of course Time is being gentle and going with the company line for their broadsheet colleagues but the fact remains that the bookkeepers at the Times could have told the editors or anybody else that Blair was fidging it. Remember that while you hear all the self-appointed shamans of this New Age gnash their teeth in commisseration with their brothers and sisters at the Times. It's more barbrastreisand, they didn't want to catch Jayson Blair because they didn't know how to handle disciplining a minority reporter that they had already "made". How do you take it back?
5 posted on 05/11/2003 4:18:13 PM PDT by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
He described the houses of grieving parents he never visited

Come on! Even Hillary does that. I don't know what all the fuss is about.

6 posted on 05/11/2003 4:22:26 PM PDT by The Great Satan (Revenge, Terror and Extortion: A Guide for the Perplexed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
Blair made three times as many mistakes as the next-highest offender

Mistakes? So there is at least another reporter who cannot tell the truth. After eight years of covering der slickmeister, the NYT cannot tell the difference between an honest mistake and deliberate lying among reporters.

7 posted on 05/11/2003 4:24:40 PM PDT by roderick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan; PJ-Comix
The Washington City Paper appears to think so. OFF TARGET (How NY Times Reporter Blair Fabricated Stories While Protected By Bosses):

Well, you'd have to meet him, say Times staffers. During his time in New York, Blair managed to seduce not only his fellow beat reporters but also masthead titans. "He was always having drinks with the right editors," recalls a former Times writer.

8 posted on 05/11/2003 4:30:40 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: roderick
And note the title of this Time magazine story. This time Time magazine isn't buying the spin.
9 posted on 05/11/2003 4:32:25 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: roderick
I also read the 10 page article, and one of the most striking things to me was that this guy was young, 27 or so years old, and yet he was allowed to write important page 1 stories using sources such as "unnamed officials" and not even his editors asked who these people were. For the future, I will consider that every "unnamed official" is just a lie, an invention, and I will pay no attention to stories that rely on them.
10 posted on 05/11/2003 4:35:27 PM PDT by walden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: walden; doug from upland; bert
I also read the 10 page article, and one of the most striking things to me was that this guy was young, 27 or so years old, and yet he was allowed to write important page 1 stories using sources such as "unnamed officials" and not even his editors asked who these people were. For the future, I will consider that every "unnamed official" is just a lie, an invention, and I will pay no attention to stories that rely on them.

Unfortunately, there are posters here on Free Republic who use the same technique and will tolerate no checks or balances.

3500 years of Western Thought and Tradition from Euclid's Elements to Robert's Rules of Order absent at some of the most prestigous institutions in place at the dawn of the 21st Century.

Best regards,

12 posted on 05/11/2003 4:52:52 PM PDT by Copernicus (A Constitutional Republic revolves around Sovereign Citizens, not citizens around government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
You are shi**ing me! That is the cover of Time? I read parts of Klein's article and its mostly bunk - the reason todays rats are not like the rats of old (FDR, Truman, JFK) is that they actually believed in defending this country, not tearing it down like the Klintons's and Carter's.
13 posted on 05/11/2003 5:01:57 PM PDT by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KC_Conspirator
That is indeed the cover of tomorrow's Time. Though you're right that Klein's article doesn't exactly measure up to what the cover promises.
14 posted on 05/11/2003 5:03:23 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DanzigGirl
Hehheh ... welcome to FR, DanzigGirl!
15 posted on 05/11/2003 5:04:23 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
Finally a reporter for the NY Times gets thrown over the side for doing what we all knew many of them have made a career doing: making up facts, using unnamed and non-existent sources, etc. Fair enough...the Times writes a lengthy retraction, cans the perpetrator (or he "resigns") and life goes on, right? No...not so fast

During the Enron, WorldCom, etc. corporate scandals I seem to remember many an editorial by the good folks at the New York Times bellowing how ignorance was no excuse, that even if the officers of those companies didn't have knowledge of wrongdoing, they should have and, bottom line, those officers should take responsibility for what their underlings had done. Fair enough. Now the Times has an opportunity to practice what it preached. Will it? Of course not. Elitists never do. That's one of the reasons why they're elitists. "Do as I say, not as I do" is the creed liberals live by and this situation will be no different.

CNN, the NY Times, the Boston Globe have all had trouble with journalistic ethics yet they never miss an opportunity to hammer on FoxNews for its' "conservative" bias. Is it any wonder the only people taking these organizations seriously are other liberal organizations?

Will the Times do the right thing? Of course not...the Times hasn't a clue as to what the right thing is...and it never will. It's simply the nature of the beast.

16 posted on 05/11/2003 5:12:31 PM PDT by blake6900
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KC_Conspirator
Joe Klein has as much credibility as Jayson Blair. Who can forget Primary Colors and the stink Klein created by using "Anonymous" as a pseudonym for that literary masterpiece? He should have been run out of town on a rail...yet, there he is, writing cover stories for Time magazine.

Ain't liberal elitism great?! And so ethical, too!

17 posted on 05/11/2003 5:22:28 PM PDT by blake6900
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
I read Klein's article and he basically says that democrats would do much better if only they were more liberal. He says this despite the fact he mentions that the last 4 democrats elected strayed from liberal orthodoxy and 3 of them were from the South. So basically he thinks Howard Dean has a serious shot. Ridiculous.
18 posted on 05/11/2003 5:27:21 PM PDT by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
I'm certainly not a fan of the NYT, but, if nothing else, they documented the inaccuracies that were published.

Would that other lefties had that level of integrity- see "Useful Idiots", anything by Robert Conquest, et. cet.

19 posted on 05/11/2003 5:27:22 PM PDT by fourdeuce82d
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fourdeuce82d
Just keep in mind that Jayson Blair was outed by Howie Kurtz in the Washington Post before The Times did anything.
20 posted on 05/11/2003 5:29:18 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson