While the NYT was telling us there was "no story" in 2004

[EFerrari]

they were sitting on the spying story.

I just wanted to remind all of you that WHILE the NYTs was holding back on the publication of the Thuggery spying on American citizens, they were sending out this letter:

Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:51:34 -0500
To: "Elizabeth Ferrari" <sfexpat2000@
From: "Public" <[e-mail]> Add to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
Subject: Re: Blackwell Locksout Certified Recount Volunteers on Fri 12/10

At 04:54 PM 12/11/2004, you wrote:


Mr. Okrent

I personally think it's outrageous that the Times
failed to cover the Conyer's hearings.

And now, Mr. Blackwell is sabotaging the Ohio recount
in violation of OH state law.

Is the Times going to ignore this whole story? I'd
like to know so that I can reconsider my subscription
options. If the Times won't cover the news, I have to
find a paper that does.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth Ferrari

San Francisco CA




Dear Ms. Ferrari,

In the first few weeks after the election several readers wrote us about this issue. Mr. Okrent responded to these concerns on his web journal. I include the entry below (see post #35).

http://forums.nytimes.com/top/opinion/readersopinions/forums/thepubliceditor/danielokrent/index.html?offset=36&fid=.f555e99/36

dokrent - 5:40 PM ET November 21, 2004 (#35 of 40)

The Times and Covering Allegations of Election Fraud

Sorry to have been neglecting this spot for so long; I could give you a list of excuses, but none of them
is especially good.

Now, though, my mailbox has begun to overflow with criticisms of The Times for not looking more deeply
into allegations of large-scale vote fraud in Ohio and Florida, a story (if true) that no one can ignore. In some
of these messages, writers say that "now that the theft of the election has been proven ...," The Times must
reveal this to the wider world.

Were the assertion even nearly so, I would do more than recommend that The Times reveal it ­ I’d be
demanding it publicly, loudly and frequently. But the evidence I have seen to date proves nothing, other than
that there was a certain amount of error in certain counties, and an aggressive effort by some partisans in
some areas to challenge some likely Democratic voters. To my knowledge, no one in the Kerry campaign’s
vast on-the-ground operation, or in its armies of well-situated lawyers, has made the argument that what
happened in Ohio (or Florida) could have changed the result of the election. Similar views were explained
in "Vote Fraud Theories, Spread By Blogs, Are Quickly Buried," by Tom Zeller (Nov. 12).

And more, I expect, will be explored and explained in future articles if meaningful allegations can indeed
be established as facts. Both Matthew Purdy, the head of The Times’s investigative unit, and Rick Berke, the
paper’s Washington editor, assure me that reporters will continue to look into the issue. I’m confident that if
they find something, they’ll publish it. A good investigative reporter (much less a whole staff of them) turning
away from a story like this one ­ if true ­ would be like a flower turning away from the sun. Careers are made
by stories that detail massive election fraud.

But: the operative words here are if true. Wishing doesn’t make it so. Although it would probably pain him to
have someone from The Times touting his work, David Corn of The Nation, in a recent column, offers plenty
of reason to examine the allegations before I, or anyone else, should leap to give them credence. You can
find Corn’s column here.

Since then, over seven hundred other readers have raised similar concerns requesting more coverage on this issue. You may be interested in the following articles:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/22/politics/22poll.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/15/politics/15ohio.html

I raised reader concerns with Mr. Okrent and a few days ago he asked me to let you know that he does not believe The Times's coverage of the voting in Ohio is over.

The following articles have since appeared:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/29/politics/29ohio.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/24/national/24vote.html

Mr. Okrent wanted me to write you back asking that you please stay tuned.

Sincerely,
Arthur Bovino
Office of the Public Editor
The New York Times

* * *

FYI

[goclark]

1. They KNEW and they only told this

because they were getting ready to have it exposed IMO.


They are as guilty as hell and they have protected the Crooks all these years.

I will never again hold the NYTimes out as a voice of TRUTH.

[EFerrari]

4. There is a thread now in GD. I will mail it to the whores.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5629422

[TomInTib]

2. At least you got a reply. Nominated......

Way to hold 'em to the fire.
Wonder when they will get around to it? Heck, it only took them a year to release the current outrage.

BTW, aren't we having a beautiful day on the Bay today? Over here the weather is just rocking.

Did Fox send your phonebook back?

[EFerrari]

3. Tom, I started a thread in GD. I am SO angry.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5629422

And, re the phonebooks, as we write a monthly column in the StreetSheet, all over San Francisco people have access to directions for joining the party.

:toast:

[mod mom]

5. Thanks for posting this-another rec'd

[bleever]

6. K&R. It's cold and rainy here; seems appropriate for a weekend we

learned that one of America's flagship newspapers let us all down so badly.

[EFerrari]

8. No pleasure in this of course, bleever.

We have to take it to them.

This cannot continue with our blessing.

It's pretty simple.

We are their targeted market.

[ananda]

7. NY Times motto is:

Ignoring stories until it's politically or economically convenient... What we do best.