The Times Continues To Unravel

poorandstupid.com blog ^ | May 22, 2003 | Donald Luskin

[WaterDragon]

THE TIMES CONTINUES TO UNRAVEL

Our friend Caroline Baum found this item, reporting on an internal memo to staff from the Rocky Mountain News' editor/publisher/president John Temple, mandating new rules for the News' own reporters, but also regulating how they can re-use syndicated material from the New York Times.

"...references to unnamed info-providers must be approved in advance 'by the managing editor or editor or, in their absence, the senior editor in charge of the newsroom' -- and the supervisor in question 'must also know the name of the source(s).'

"More intriguing was Temple's newly declared policy in regard to the publishing of [New York] Times reports in the News. He announced that 'New York Times stories that use anonymous sources must be approved in advance' by the same editor or editors noted above -- an astonishing development, because it suggests that in a few short weeks, the Times has gone from being among the most trusted news purveyors on the planet to a publication viewed with suspicion by its peers."

[WaterDragon]

It's about time local newspapers stopped accepting NYTimes stuff without checking. I long ago stopped reading the national and international news in my local paper (Knight-Ridder) because it all comes from the Times. Worthless. Necessary to check EVERYTHING via reliable sources.

[martin_fierro]

[fightinJAG]

A similar article was posted about The St. Petersburg Times a week or so ago. They also included the Washington Post as a paper they were loathe to quote because of its reliance on unnamed sources.

[martin_fierro]

[So Cal Rocket]

Anyone care to take a guess at what paper published the following editorial?

"When a reputable newspaper lies, it poisons the community. Every other newspaper story becomes suspect. Anyone stung by a newspaper story feels emboldened to call it a lie. Facts are not only impugned but made impotent. . . . The lie--the fabricated event, the made-up quote, the fictitious source--is the nightmare of any respected newsroom. It is intolerable not only because it discredits publications but because it debases communication, and democracy."

[ClearCase_guy]

I think the media should just get rid of "unamed sources", people speaking "off the record" and the good old "some people say".

The only way to bring integrity back into the News is to state only facts which can be verified.

[WaterDragon]

Holding my breath. Which?

[So Cal Rocket]

The New York Times - April 17, 1981

This was the editorial that the New York Times ran when its competitors at the Washington Post put their foot in it with a famous, Pulitzer-winning hoax by reporter Janet Cooke.

[WaterDragon]

*snort!* We shouldn't forget 'hypocrisy' when we list the NYT's sins.

[xJones]

They also included the Washington Post as a paper they were loathe to quote because of its reliance on unnamed sources.

Bob Woodard's books are the finest (worst) examples of "take my word, I have 2 or more sources" even when people present at the so-called scenes said it didn't/couldn't have happened.

[PianoMan]

David Letterman last night - "The news was so bad today, the New York Times didn't even need to make it up."

[Eric Esot]

I think the media should just get rid of "unamed sources", people speaking "off the record" and the good old "some people say".

I am particularly found of it when an unnamed source tells someone off the record about what some anonymous insider is saying.

[alloysteel]

What if it comes out some day, in the far future, that "Deep Throat" was a complete fabrication? Thirty years of distorted history, while America was being fed Thorazine. We had to tolerate Jimmy Carter, and the deterioration of foreign policy, and economic disaster, for starters, and most of recent events were driven by attempts to recover from that major assault on our national institutions.

[VOA]

RE: your good cartoon of the NYTimes as fish-wrapper:

As the liberals always loved to say about Ronald Reagan (for who knows what reason):

"The Fish Rots From The Head Down"

Hear that Mr. Raines?

[Travis McGee]

What if it comes out some day, in the far future, that "Deep Throat" was a complete fabrication?

That has always been my Watergate theory, and I have never seen a speck of evidence to the contrary.

[thegreatbeast]

We've already traversed a long distance from the point where Deep Throat was a single person. Many people now think Deep Throat was a composite made up of a few different individuals.
I don't think for a second that Woodward had those deathbed interviews with the CIA director.

[wayoverontheright]

Let's face it, at some point the New York Times became the print world's self appointed purveyor of the leftist line.

Siding with the left has by necessity involved distortion of reality, perversion of history, and a manipulation of news in order to promote a failed ideology.

Is it any wonder that it would not only attract, but actively promote someone so obviously adept at prevaricating?

[singsong]

Race did not play a part in it, except making the cover-up easier. Blair was valued because of his product. He knew what NYT wanted and provided it. They probably knew he was making stuff up, but kept him because he himself took the responsibility for it. They wanted what he offered. That was the deal. Race is the "damage control" strategy now. Make it sound like "Oh we screwed because we are sooo goood to blacks." They don't give a flying s**t for anybody, black or white, unless they subscribe to their philosophy of filt of course.

[Liz]

But don't you think the Times will contaminate the fish?