Free Republic

New York Times reporter Judith Miller speaks during the 2005 SPJ Convention & National Journalism Conference in Las Vegas Tuesday, Oct. 18, 2005. Miller, who was jailed 85 days for refusing to reveal a source, defended her decision to go to jail to protect the source and told a journalism conference Tuesday that reporters need a federal shield law so that others won't face the same sanctions. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong) WASHINGTON -- In the latest fallout from the CIA leak investigation, reporter Judith Miller and The New York Times are engaging in a very public fight about her seeming...

The New York Times' "public editor" delivered a blistering attack on the paper for what he called "stonewalling" about its story on the Bush administration's domestic eavesdropping. Byron Calame said on Dec. 19 that he sent 28 questions to executive editor Bill Keller about the Times' "woefully inadequate" explanation of its decision to sit on the story for a year. Keller refused to answer the questions, saying, "There is really no way to have a full discussion of the back story without talking about when and how we knew what we knew, and we can't do that." Calame said that...

New York Times executives are "stonewalling" on questions about the paper's decision to publish top secret information about the Bush administration's use of the National Security Agency to conduct surveillance operations against terrorists, the paper's public editor charged on Sunday. "The New York Times's explanation of its decision to report, after what it said was a one-year delay, that the National Security Agency is eavesdropping domestically without court-approved warrants was woefully inadequate," public editor Byron Calame wrote in a New Years Day column. In its initial report on Dec. 16, Times said that editors held the story at the request...

The full grovelBy Thomas LifsonJan. 1,2006 Byron Calame, public editor of the New York Times, addresses his newspaper's role in publishing leaked classified information about the NSA's surveillance program. As the Department of Justice has launched an investigation of the probably criminal leaking and possibly criminal publication of the data, interest in the matter could not be higher. Shockingly enough, his superiors stonewall him when it comes to explaining why they waited a year to publish the revelations. Moreover, their story about the actual time interval of the delay has certain inconsistencies. Usually, when those under investigation for possible criminal...

Yes, it's New Year's Eve. And since there's no rest for the NYTimes, I'm not taking it easy tonight either. You see, NYTimes' reporter James Risen has been a busy bee over the holidays. The co-author of the infamous Chicken Little opus exposing the NSA special collection program to monitor international communications between suspected al Qaeda operatives and their contacts will be launching his new book, State of War, on January 3. Turns out the publisher of Risen's new book, which includes a discussion of NSA eavesdropping, has moved up the publication date to this coming Tuesday. (It was originally...

THE New York Times's explanation of its decision to report, after what it said was a one-year delay, that the National Security Agency is eavesdropping domestically without court-approved warrants was woefully inadequate. And I have had unusual difficulty getting a better explanation for readers, despite the paper's repeated pledges of greater transparency...................

HOW THE NYTIMES IS RINGING IN 2006 By Michelle Malkin   ·   December 31, 2005 10:45 PM Yes, it's New Year's Eve. And since there's no rest for the NYTimes, I'm not taking it easy tonight either. You see, NYTimes' reporter James Risen has been a busy bee over the holidays. The co-author of the infamous Chicken Little opus exposing the NSA special collection program to monitor international communications between suspected al Qaeda operatives and their contacts will be launching his new book, State of War, on January 3. Turns out the publisher of Risen's new book, which includes a discussion...

The New York Times's explanation of its decision to report, after what it said was a one-year delay, that the National Security Agency is eavesdropping domestically without court-approved warrants was woefully inadequate. And I have had unusual difficulty getting a better explanation for readers, despite the paper's repeated pledges of greater transparency. For the first time since I became public editor, the executive editor and the publisher have declined to respond to my requests for information about news-related decision-making. My queries concerned the timing of the exclusive Dec. 16 article about President Bush's secret decision in the months after 9/11...

Was Sunday's upbeat New York Times piece on Air America hosts Rachel Maddow and Randi Rhodes at least partly the result of a "pitch" by the liberal radio network's public relations department? Could that make "They Look Nothing Like Rush Limbaugh" the result of a corporate spin campaign? Is that journalism? After receiving a document-backed inside tip, the Radio Equalizer is investigating whether Air America's Jamie Horn convinced New York Times reporter Susan Brenna to write a self-serving piece on Air America's female hosts. Should America's third-largest newspaper allow reporters to accept story ideas from PR flaks? Or is that...

Now Is the Time The lifting of the contempt order against Judith Miller of The New York Times in connection with the Valerie Wilson leak investigation leaves no reason for the paper to avoid providing a full explanation of the situation. Now. As public editor, I have been asking some basic questions of the key players at The Times since July 12. But they declined to fully respond to my fundamental questions because, they said, of the legal entanglements of Ms. Miller and the paper. With Ms. Miller in jail and the legal situation unclear, I felt it would be...

IT'S time to write Chapter 2 of the public editor chronicles at The New York Times. Recently retired after almost 40 years at The Wall Street Journal, I've agreed to become The Times's second public editor - an outsider dedicated to representing readers and serving as a watchdog over the paper's journalistic integrity. In this first column, I hope to provide a sense of who I am and how I intend to tackle the job. The first public editor, Daniel Okrent, boldly established the genuine independence essential to carrying out the job and elegantly dissected many of the major issues...