Editorials & Other Articles

Bill USA

(6,436 posts) Tue Jul 28, 2015, 06:07 PM Jul 2015

Ornstein: NYT's Handling Of Clinton Email Story "A Direct Challenge To Its Fundamental Credibility"

The Atlantic's Ornstein: NY Times' Handling Of Clinton Email Story "A Direct Challenge To Its Fundamental Credibility"
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/07/28/the-atlantics-ornstein-ny-times-handling-of-cli/204635

American Enterprise Institute scholar and The Atlantic contributing writer Norman Ornstein is strongly criticizing The New York Times' botched story on Hillary Clinton's emails, and its handling of the aftermath.

Ornstein writes that "the huge embarrassment over the story ... is a direct challenge to its fundamental credibility." He adds, "The paper's response since the initial huge error was uncovered has not been adequate or acceptable," pointing to Times editor Dean Baquet's response:

[blockquote style="border:1px solid #000000;padding:10px;"]Times editor Dean Baquet does not fault his reporters; "You had the government confirming that it was a criminal referral," he said. That raised another question. What is "the government?" Is any employee of the Justice Department considered the government? Was it an official spokesperson? A career employee? A policy-level person, such as an assistant attorney general or deputy assistant attorney general? One definitively without an ax to grind? Did the DOJ official tell the reporters it was a criminal referral involving Clinton, or a more general criminal referral? And if this was a mistake made by an official spokesperson, why not identify the official who screwed up bigtime?

This story demands more than a promise to do better the next time, and more than a shrug.

Later Ornstein notes, "Holding a story until you are sure you have the facts--as other reporters did, with, it seems, 'government officials' shopping the story around--or waiting until you can actually read the documents instead of relying on your good sources, so to speak, providing misleading and slanted details, is what they could have done differently." Ornstein concludes that someone at the Times "should be held accountable here, with suspension or other action that fits the gravity of the offense."
(more)