The NY Times: "They're acting like the target of a scandal."

[crispini]

Fascinating HuffPo blog by Jay Rosen that points out exactly how strange what's going on at the NYTimes is:

"I find the Times' conduct at this point inexplicable," said Michael Isikoff of Newsweek magazine on CNN's Reliable Sources. ...

The host, Howard Kurtz, pointed out that when Isikoff's poorly sourced story on the desecration of the Koran ran in Newsweek, ... the editors "did an investigation and set the record straight." Has the New York Times "come close to doing that here?" he asked.

No, it hasn't. And no one knows why. The official story seems to be: "Wait for the official story." Until then, normal operations are suspended. We're told that Miller is talking to the paper's reporters, and a major article is on the way. We're also told it's been delayed. There is no date for it. The editors will barely talk about it. Meanwhile the story keeps heating up.....

As I said on Reliable Sources, the paper "has lost the capacity to tell the truth about itself in this story." (I also said it may yet recover.) What we don't know is why the Times has gone into editorial default. Nor do we know when normal operations will be restored. The explanations given don't make much sense. From what I have been able to learn, concerned journalists at the paper, former Times staffers, and peers in national journalism are as baffled, as alarmed as the bloggers and critics. And of course no Times person even thinks of going on-the-record with any doubts-- a statement in itself.

more....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jay-rosen/the-shimmer-missing-dat_b_8706.html

[Halliburton]

1. hopefully they'll be brought down in this too

:popcorn:

[BlueEyedSon]

3. Then where will I get my morning Krugman fix?

[madinmaryland]

10. How do you get it now?

Do you pay for it? I found if you wait a couple of days, commondreams.org will print his columns. I won't pay for content.

[BlueEyedSon]

12. My NYT (paper version) subscript. If the times folds, who will pay

Krugman for his opinion?

[glitch]

18. Maybe he'll post for free to the Huffington Post, which seems to be

getting better and better.

[MADem]

24. It will not fold, it is way too branded. They could well "clean house"

though, and do some massive firing and reorganizing.

The same bunch that owns the NYT owns the Boston Globe. They're everywhere. It will not fold, it will simply be disinfected, polished up, and sent out into the world once again, if the stink on them is bad enough.

[DoYouEverWonder]

2. So Judy's bosses are in on it too?

I wonder if any of them have testified to the GJ or if they are also targets of the investigation?

[crispini]

4. I read a story on here yesterday -- I can't remember where --

but somebody, I think it was on KOS, theorized that one of Judy's superiors had in fact already given Fitz her notes, waaaaaaay back when, without telling Judy.

Interesting theory -- it would explain how Fitz was able to get her notes out of her (he already had them) and was able to get the earlier conversation out of her and Scooter (he already had the info). It would also explain why the Times is acting so damn guilty.

[seemslikeadream]

5. Merry Merry Fitzmas crispini

It's beginning to look a lot like Fitzmas
Everywhere you go.
Who's gonna do five-or-ten?
We're thinking once again
Of handcuffs and of orange jumpsuits aglow.
It's beginning to look a lot like Fitzmas
Indictments on every score
But the prettiest sight to see
Is the scowl on Darth Cheney
At the slammer's front door.

A warrant or writ, a subpoena that fits
Is the wish of Barney and Ben;
The thought of Turdblossom hung up like a possum
Is the hope of Janice and Jen;
And Mom and Dad can hardly wait for court to start again.

It's beginning to look a lot like Fitzmas
Everywhere you go.
There's an defendant who doesn't want to tell;
One in the White House as well --
The felony kind that doesn't mind the law!
It's beginning to look a lot like Fitzmas
Soon the bells will start
And the thing that will make them ring
Is the indictment that we sing,
Right within our hearts!

crispini

[crispini]

8. Hee hee hee!

Did you ever do a "Fitzmas Greatest Hits" compilation thread? I won't be able to find all of these wonderful songs when the big day rolls around and I will want to post them all over and over again with an extremely irritating frequency. :silly:

M E R R Y F I T Z M A S ! :toast:

[WiseButAngrySara]

6. VERY interesting...Perhaps the NYTs' is becoming aware that they will

have to accept their role and responsibility in promotion of an illegal, 'trumped-up' War? What are your thoughts on this?

K and R.

[crispini]

9. I dunno....

Here's a snip from an earlier column by Rosen, in which he calls the paper "Judy Miller's New York Times."

Miller is a longtime friend of the publisher, Arthur Sulzberger, Jr. They socialize. It’s not a scandal, but it is a fact. Sulzberger has stood behind her in a show of support that anyone watching can see is personal, and strongly-felt. She has the full support of Executive Editor Bill Keller, who has said (more or less) she’s a First Amendment hero— not a martyr, Keller would say, but a hero in the sense of acting with exemplary courage and personal conviction in civil disobedience to the law.

Colliding ominously with these two facts are several others. The weight of professional opinion—once solidly behind Judy Miller, for a long time split 60/40 for her—is now decisively against. (I would think reader opinion is similarly thumbs down.) Most journalists seem baffled by her explanations, and dubious about the waiver that wasn’t, then was. They do not see her cause as necessarily just.

Within the Times, I don’t know what the feelings are, but it isn’t possible that people there are insulated from the above facts. They know what their peers in the press think. The Washington bureau, in my opinion, has been humiliated by the plea of nolo contendere. And I doubt that I am the only one who sees it that way.

more...

http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2005/10/04/tms_pst.html

I am beginning to wonder if the Times itself has been gravely compromised by this story. It seems to me that they are somehow part of the story in the way that the other papers are not.

[WiseButAngrySara]

17. Thanks for the post and llink, and my 'gut' tells me you're right on this

one!

I am beginning to wonder if the Times itself has been gravely compromised by this story. It seems to me that they are somehow part of the story in the way that the other papers are not.

[ClintonTyree]

7. How the mighty gave fallen.....

The New York Times, once considered "the paper of record" on the world of journalism has been reduced to third rate scandal sheet status because of their harboring of and covering up for Judy Miller. It's quite apparent the Ms. Miller is far more than just another source in the Plame investigation, that she may well be an active participant in this treasonous act.
But The New York Times remains silent, unwilling to dissect the body of truth that lays before them. Are they waiting for Fitzgerald's decisions before making a commitment to telling the truth? Are they stalling to see just how far Fitzgerald goes before they unfold their hand?
They've done irreparable harm to their reputation over this, I can't see how they can atone for their actions. "The Paper of Record" has become so much fish wrap now and their hesitance to comment on this is just making it worse. Expect NYT subscriptions to plummet in the near future.

[WiseButAngrySara]

19. The once mighty NYT fallen to 'fish wrap' !!!! That's GOOD.

:rofl:

[MadisonProgressive]

22. That's what I think

NYT is waiting to find out how much Fitz knows before they publish. They may have to edit some things out.

[Ellen Forradalom]

25. NYT fell a long time ago

when (to use a phrase of Bartcop's) they let Matt Drudge become their editor-in-chief during the Monica episode.

[NNN0LHI]

11. They give the same excuses Bush does for not talking about it

Thats odd.

Don

[yellowcanine]

13. Miller should have been shit canned when it was revealed that she was

trying to run the hunt for WMDs while imbedded with a search team in Iraq.

[in_cog_ni_to]

14. I think they're in on the cover-up

and if Judy goes down, they go down. I can't wait for this saga to play out!

:popcorn:

[enough]

15. I like Rosen's writing on this.

A very thorough and knowledgeable article with useful links. Thanks

[babylonsister]

16. Perhaps the NYT has been instructed by Fitz

to keep it zipped until the indictments (plural!) are handed down. That could explain their silence.

[seemslikeadream]

21. That's what I'm thinking also babylonsister

[Just Me]

23. Yep! They would be unwise to publish info given to the GJ,...

,...until AFTER the indictments are officially released.

[CantGetFooledAgain]

20. Operation Mockingbird

No wonder they can't tell the truth.