Tuesday, April 08, 2008
Barf, New York Times excuse for not covering "Winter Soldier"
So Honolulu media choose to omit mention of seasick passengers on a ferry ride. Not a world-class concern perhaps (except that it makes me wonder what else I'm not being told when a big business advertiser is involved).
When the New York Times, however, deliberately chooses to skip coverage of a significant event such as the Winter Soldier hearings held last month near Washington DC, you know that manipulation is afoot.
FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) took them to task. At least, the Times editors responded to their concerns. We didn't know about it, they claimed. Barf!
You can decide for yourself if this great newspaper really didn't know about the hearing. Check out FAIR's article, New York Times Explains Winter Soldier Blackout, which begins:
New York Times public editor Clark Hoyt has offered a response to media activists who wrote to the paper about its non-coverage of last month's Winter Soldier hearings. Hoyt's explanation is that reporters at the Times had "not been aware of the group or its meeting," but likely wouldn't have covered it if they had been aware of the event.
The idea that the Times was unaware of Winter Soldier is remarkable; the paper's D.C. reporters were repeatedly sent press releases about the events, the same ones that other media outlets received that did manage to cover the event, ranging from Pacifica Radio's Democracy Now! to the New York Times' corporate sibling the Boston Globe.
Our local papers are, well, local. The New York Times is probably the most cited newspaper in the world. What they write is influential. With great power comes great responsibility.
Omitting coverage of the four-day Winter Soldier testimony was deliberate and revealing.
Check out also The Lies of our Times, by Amy Goodman and David Goodman.
There are none so blind as those who delete press releases and then claim they didn't know about the event.
Of all the excuses they could have come up with, that one takes the cake..
Is that going to be local corporate press’ excuse for their black-out of the news of the race discrimination law suit at Superferry builder’s Austal’s Alabama ship yard?
It begs the question- if a tree falls in a newsroom and reporters ignore it can they plausibly claim it didn’t make a sound?
Old Joke Warning-
Larry: “Hey I have a story here about you having beans in you ears”
NY Times: “Sorry I can’t hear you- I have beans in my ears”
The Times' response that they prefer to do their own reporting rather than rely on the accounts of others is absurd. A good newspaper does both, especially when it's a war where they don't actually have reporters who double as soldiers. And to claim that their three Pentagon reporters were unavailable is also lame. They surely have some general assignment reporters, or even feature writers who could have covered this.
Thank goodness for Democracy Now!