The Times has a motivation to continue to cover this story, although their earlier coverage was pathetic. This is just too much like Jayson Blair, and now that there's blood in the water, they'll probably stay on it.
"Now that there's blood in the water, they'll probaby stay on it.
No, I agree with the earlier post. The Times doesn't want to get its prissy little hands dirty on this story. The Washington Post - especially Michael Dobbs is beating them by miles.
The Times keeps beating the Abu Ghraib story because they want desperately to get more Pulizers than last year. They aren't really doing it for the readers.
Oh, sure the print investigator journalists will eventually kick in. Oh, I'd give 'em about 6 weeks to uncover the relative truth. We should see the mass expose' in the two coastal Times, the WA Post, & USA Today appear in the Nov. 3 edition.