re: judith miller

I've been writing to the nyt complaining about judith miller for over a year.

 today i received a response.

Dear n69n,

I include below, Bill Keller's response to allegations against Judith Miller's reporting on weapons of mass destruction to which you refer as written to Daniel Okrent in light of other readers' submitted concerns:

" I followed the WMD controversy at a bit of a distance before I moved into this job. When I learned I'd become executive editor I went back and re-read the coverage -- and the criticism, which had acquired the power of passionate conventional wisdom. (A fair amount of the mail on this subject seemed to me to come from people who had not actually read the coverage, but had heard about it on the cyber-grapevine.) My survey of the material left me with two conclusions.
        First, I did not see a prima facie case for recanting or repudiating the stories. The brief against the coverage was that it was insufficiently skeptical, but that is an easier claim to make in hindsight than in context. (By context I mean such things as, what others were writing at the time, what role editors played in handling and presenting the stories, how credible the sources were, etc.)
        Second, lacking prima facie evidence, opening a docket and litigating the claims against the coverage was likely to consume more of my attention than I was willing to invest. I decided that, in the absence of more persuasive complaints than I have seen so far, I would base my assessment of Judy's work on what she did on my watch.
        My experience of Judy, most extensively when I was managing editor, is that she is a smart, well-sourced, industrious and fearless reporter with a keen instinct for news, and an appetite for dauntingly hard subjects -- advanced weapons, terrorism, Middle East politics, etc. Her early coverage of Osama bin Laden was uniquely foresighted before 9/11, and was at least partly responsible for one of our Pulitzers. Like many aggressive reporters, particularly reporters who deal with contentious subjects, she has sometimes stepped on toes, but that is hardly grounds for rebuke. That was my assessment of Judy when I worked with her before, and nothing she has published in the paper since I became executive editor has caused me to think less of her."

        Thanks for writing,
        Arthur Bovino
        Office of the Public Editor
        The New York Times

a refresher on judith miller.

love to hear your comments.

•  Thanks for posting this -- I'll be following up

  For my previous writings on Miller, you can start here and follow the links.

  by Swopa on Sat Jan 10, 2004 at 12:12:35 AM PDT

•  good people and mistakes

  I notice the end of the missive includes the standard defense so-and-so is a good person so I'm not going to hold him or her accountable for his unethical or wrong actions.  The implied "because" is because it would upset my worldview.  I refuse to accept that good people can do bad things that warrant punishment.

  by Carl Nyberg on Sat Jan 10, 2004 at 12:14:10 AM PDT

  •  My little Judy WOULD NEVER tell a fib!

    & not only that, retreating behind "JUDY" instead of "JUDITH"....ie. "My little Judy WOULD NEVER tell a fib...on purpose!"

    www.nornsisland.com

    by n69n on Sat Jan 10, 2004 at 10:32:11 AM PDT

•  hmmm

  Well fortunately I had already written off the NYT in a long slow descent over years, since about '90.  It has long been part of hte America first and best boosterism, which is fine, I knew it was that, but it used to still manage to give me other things.  Better writing for one, that was part of the breakaway.
  Losing someone like Anthony Lewis more recently, an actual liberal, from the OpEd pages.  Gaining Brooks [spit spit spit].

  Yikes.  So they love love love JUdy.
   According to Gilliard that may be part of the problem.  It sure entered my head one day back listening to Lehrer with Judy on the phone from her famous embed with the WMD busting force [!]. Such girlish breathless ness. I'd be a fool not to think it.

  by Marisacat on Sat Jan 10, 2004 at 12:18:35 AM PDT

•  His name is too appropriate.

  Someone producing such bullshit is named "Bovino?"
  Are they pulling your leg?

  by citizen Able on Sat Jan 10, 2004 at 12:33:01 AM PDT

•  dang

  over a year? props to you! for holding her feet to the fire. leave a post so we can rate you.

  they've groomed this propagandist for too long to let her go now over a few complaints. you know, the scandal nyt should have gotten busted for was not jayson blair, but for masquerading as an objective news source.

  i was looking up some info on daniel pipes not long ago, when whaddya know, i found out he and miller both belong to the same middle east think tank. thomas friedman as well belongs to an interesting think tank with ties to neocons.

  it should be required for "journalists" to disclose their think tank memberships so people can check for bias. we should write NYT (and TNR for that matter) to demand think tank membership disclosures from their columnists.

  just like it's unethical for stock analysts to withold disclosures that would point to their vested interests, it should be unethical for columnists to withhold disclosure of membership to think tanks that if revealed would expose their bias.

  by niner on Sat Jan 10, 2004 at 12:43:17 AM PDT

  •  one's think-tank credentials

    it just seems only common-sense to have all one's think-tank credentials listed in one's byline.

    www.nornsisland.com

    by n69n on Sat Jan 10, 2004 at 10:30:38 AM PDT

•  "Judy"

  I find it weird that he calls her "Judy" rather than Ms. Miller. Its like,  "You shouldn't hit the girl, you know."  But this woman played a role in getting people killed.

  Post a comment so we can give you some ratings, n69n.  Thanks for all the nice ratings you've given the rest of us.

  by Lois on Sat Jan 10, 2004 at 12:44:47 AM PDT

•  Shorter Bill Keller

  Shorter Bill Keller: Because Judith Miller's transgressions were not as simple and clear-cut as, say, Jayson Blair's, I am unable and unwilling to determine their gravity.

  by DavidNYC on Sat Jan 10, 2004 at 01:35:09 AM PDT