PDA

View Full Version : Miller Brouhaha


zimv20
Jul 29, 2003, 12:08 AM
link (http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=3057)

fascinating article from the american journalism review that examines the reporting of the new york times' judy miller and makes general comments on the state of the american media during the war.

well worth the read.

IJ Reilly
Jul 29, 2003, 12:47 AM
Very much so, thanks for the link.

zimv20
Jul 29, 2003, 12:53 AM
you're welcome. it's amazing how one mysterious guy in a baseball cap can become a knowledgable "scientist," then "scientists."

IJ Reilly
Jul 29, 2003, 12:59 AM
I guess he wore a lot of hats.

Edit: Coincidentally, this evening the NewsHour ran a piece about Watergate 30 years on. Interviewed was Sam Dash, who remarked that media was doing its duty back then -- and the system succeeded in ferreting out law-breaking at the very top of the government -- but they're not exactly on station today. He said it in stronger and more eloquent terms. Worth checking that out as well.

zimv20
Jul 29, 2003, 01:01 AM
Originally posted by IJ Reilly
I guess he wore a lot of hats.

:-)

jbomber
Jul 29, 2003, 02:18 AM
how come she hasn't been as publicly lambasted as the young Mr. Blair? As the article suggests, her actions have potentially global ramifications...the kind of ramifications that fan the flames of war. What Jaysion Blair did was wrong, but all it did was embarass the New York Times...

zimv20
Jul 29, 2003, 02:28 AM
Originally posted by jbomber
how come she hasn't been as publicly lambasted as the young Mr. Blair?

print journalists aren't celebrities. at least not for those who get most of their news from the TV.

jbomber
Jul 29, 2003, 02:46 AM
Originally posted by zimv20
print journalists aren't celebrities. at least not for those who get most of their news from the TV.

agreed, but jayson blair was just another print journalist. they came pretty close to crucifying him for his actions. Miller seems to be getting little more than a slap on the wrists for her wrong doing. I'm wondering if the nature of their messages had/has anything to do with it.

wwworry
Jul 29, 2003, 06:03 AM
I especially like this quote:
Cheney replied: "Specifically aluminum tubes. There's a story in the New York Times this morning--this is--I don't--and I want to attribute the Times. I don't want to talk about, obviously, specific intelligence sources, but it's now public that, in fact, he has been seeking to acquire...the kind of tubes that are necessary to build a centrifuge."

When Bob Simon heard about this interview, he told me, he smelled a rat. "You leak a story to the New York Times," he says, "and the New York Times prints it, and then you go on the Sunday shows quoting the New York Times and corroborating your own information. You've got to hand it to them. That takes, as we say here in New York, chutzpah."

IJ Reilly
Jul 29, 2003, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by jbomber
agreed, but jayson blair was just another print journalist. they came pretty close to crucifying him for his actions. Miller seems to be getting little more than a slap on the wrists for her wrong doing. I'm wondering if the nature of their messages had/has anything to do with it.

And don't forget, the New York Times is the bastion of the Liberal Media in the US, or so we're told.

zimv20
Jul 29, 2003, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by jbomber
I'm wondering if the nature of their messages had/has anything to do with it.

in miller's case, i'm quite certain. i wonder if blair being black had anything to do w/ his treatment.

and before anyone jumps on me, yes, blair should have been fired. but he was really crucified by the rest of the media, where my industry friends tell me similar things happen all the time. at least the times was big enough to admit to it.