Slate: Judy's Turn To Cry

[Raster]

The New York Times prepares an "Editors' Note" about its prewar WMD reporting.

By Jack Shafer
Posted Tuesday, May 25, 2004, at 2:39 PM PT

Sources inside and close to the New York Times say that the newspaper is preparing an "Editors' Note" that will reassess its pre-Iraq War coverage, particularly its coverage of weapons of mass destruction. The note is said to address the reporting failures of Times staffers, including Judith Miller, and could be published as early as tomorrow (Wednesday, May 26).

On a separate track, Times Public Editor Daniel Okrent has been calling Times staffers to discuss the WMD issue, fueling speculations that he, too, will write about the subject in his Sunday column. Okrent and Times Executive Editor Bill Keller had previously declined to audit Miller's WMD coverage. Okrent said he didn't wanted to get bogged down in evaluating the paper's past deeds as he began his public editorship; Keller cited both cost-benefit analysis and his faith in Miller's reportorial abilities in demurring.

Miller's work on WMD in the Times deserves special scrutiny because so many of her sensational stories never panned out—from a December 2001 piece about now-discredited Iraqi defector Adnan Ihsan Saeed al-Haideri, who claimed inside knowledge about a score of Iraq WMD programs and storage facilities, to a December 2002 scoop about a possible Russia-Iraq smallpox collaboration, to a January 2003 eve-of-war piece reiterating the defectors' stories of Iraqi WMD. Miller's credulous reporting turned absolutely hyperbolic when she joined the search for WMD on the ground in Iraq, embedding with the U.S. military's Mobile Exploitation Team Alpha. In an April 21, 2003, piece, Miller claimed that an Iraqi scientist had led the military to a cache of precursor compounds for a banned "toxic agent." She told The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer the next day that the scientist was more than a "smoking gun" in the WMD search, he was the "silver bullet." But by July 2003, still no WMD had been found in Iraq. Instead of blaming the defectors and inside sources who had led her astray, Miller put the onus on the poor logistics of the weapons search! (See this "The Scoops That Melted," a "Press Box" from last year for more details.)

<snip, more>

http://slate.msn.com/id/2101124/#ContinueArticle

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. It is official now

the Fourth Estate IS REBELLING...

This is an open revolt.

Damn ABOUT BLOODY TIME

[Must_B_Free]

2. They sure are

time for the pen to take on the sword

[KissMyAsscroft]

3. Doesn't matter...

They conspired to lie us into a war which killed thousands...

A "oopsie" isnt going to fix it..its way past that.

And their "apology" didnt even mention Miller...

They allowed their "newspaper" to be used for propaganda...they should be tried for treason.

[gumby]

5. kick

you said it.

sad, isn't it?

[Old and In the Way]

4. Why haven't they fired her ass out of there?

Miller was obviously doing double duty as a CIA/administration asset in using the NYT to promote this war. They've made hi-profile firings of city beat reporters for making up stories of limited interest, but Miller's lies helped sell the war to this nation.....so why is she still working there?????

[rpannier]

6. I want to know why...

when reporters (from the times who do not support shrub) hedge and lie in stories they are fired and publically denounced. When pub people lie and distort, there's almost nothing.