THE New York Times's explanation of its decision to report, after what it said was a one-year delay, that the National Security Agency is eavesdropping domestically without court-approved warrants was woefully inadequate. And I have had unusual difficulty getting a better explanation for readers, despite the paper's repeated pledges of greater transparency.Read the whole thing here. Public editor Byron Calome is not too happy with his employer.
For the first time since I became public editor, the executive editor and the publisher have declined to respond to my requests for information about news-related decision-making. My queries concerned the timing of the exclusive Dec. 16 article about President Bush's secret decision in the months after 9/11 to authorize the warrantless eavesdropping on Americans in the United States.
I e-mailed a list of 28 questions to Bill Keller, the executive editor, on Dec. 19, three days after the article appeared. He promptly declined to respond to them. I then sent the same questions to Arthur Sulzberger Jr., the publisher, who also declined to respond. They held out no hope for a fuller explanation in the future.
Monday, January 02, 2006
NY Times Stonewalling Its Own Public Editor
The senior officials at the NY Times have gone to ground and refuse the discuss the curious timing of the Dec. 16 NSA spying report, which the Times supposedly sat on for over a year. The paper's own public editor can't even get his questions answered:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment