Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What Happened to Skepticism?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
democracy1st Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-08-09 12:27 AM
Original message
What Happened to Skepticism?
NEW YORK TIMES PUBLIC EDITOR HITS PAPER FOR ''SERIOUSLY FLAWED'' GITMO STORY

WHEN former Vice President Dick Cheney assailed President Obama’s plan to close the prison at Guantánamo last month, he used ammunition plucked right from that morning’s Times.

The top front-page headline that day, May 21, read: “1 in 7 Detainees Rejoined Jihad, Pentagon Finds.” The article reported in the first paragraph that an unreleased Pentagon study had concluded that about one in seven of the 534 prisoners already transferred abroad from Guantánamo had “returned to terrorism or militant activity.”

It was big news on a morning when Obama and Cheney would deliver dueling visions of how to keep the nation safe. “One in seven cut a straight path back to their prior line of work and have conducted murderous attacks in the Middle East,” Cheney said in a speech.


But the article on which he based that statement was seriously flawed and greatly overplayed. It demonstrated again the dangers when editors run with exclusive leaked material in politically charged circumstances and fail to push back skeptically. The lapse is especially unfortunate at The Times, given its history in covering the run-up to the Iraq war.


The article seemed to adopt the Pentagon’s contention that freed prisoners had “returned” to terrorism, ignoring independent reporting by The Times and others that some of them may not have been involved in terrorism before but were radicalized at Guantánamo. It failed to distinguish between former prisoners suspected of new acts of terrorism — more than half the cases — and those supposedly confirmed to have rejoined jihad against the West. Had only confirmed cases been considered, one in seven would have changed to one in 20.

I started hearing from readers immediately, and the volume of protest picked up after FAIR, a liberal media watchdog group, posted a critique of the article.

Read more
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/opinion/07pubed.html?ref=opinion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-08-09 12:33 AM
Response to Original message
1. That editorial should have read "We Fucked Up". It didn't nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puzzler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-08-09 03:12 AM
Response to Original message
2. But wasn't Cheney and co. responsible for those releases?
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC