<snip>
Like The New York Times with its famous editors' note in May, The Washington Post deserves credit for admitting serious mistakes in its pre-war coverage of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. As with The Times, however, it is a day late and a holler short.
At least The Post ran Howard Kurtz's critical August 12 piece on the front page, something it inevitably failed to do with stories skeptical of the march to war. But praise for any newspaper should be limited when it merely acknowledges the obvious, with little corrective action promised. It should also be noted that last week's story was solely Kurtz's idea, although Executive Editor Leonard Downie, Jr. agreed to publish it.
E & P is no enemy of The Washington Post. We have regularly hailed its postwar WMD coverage, singling out Barton Gellman, Dana Priest and others for beating The New York Times. The Post has no Judith Miller albatross hanging around its neck. It put the Kurtz piece in a prominent position, not buried, as The Times did with its May editors' note. It even named a few names, also something The Times failed to do.
So why not give The Post a pass on the lax standards and disturbing attitudes revealed in the Kurtz article?
<snip>
Link:
http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000612630I guess the true journalists these days, with a few exceptions, are these ombudsman types. And I DON'T mean Kurtz!!!
Thank you E & P!!!
:toast:
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
