Ripping judith miller on pbs newshour

[r_u_stuck2]

Doing an excellent job showing the bias and false reporting

[kaitykaity]

1. Oh, goodie.

Won't miss it.

[roguevalley]

2. BWAHAHA! THERE IS A GOD!

[RafterMan]

3. Big kick to Judy

I was just ranting about her to someone last week.

Here is the piece, if anyone who wanted to hear missed it:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/newshour_index.html

[AlCzervik]

4. Is it a group ripping or

is it margaret or Jim reading off some copy?

[RafterMan]

5. Ray and two "media watchdog" reps

discuss the Times admission that its WMD coverage has been flawed. The Times declined to join the interview and didn't name Miller, but they focus on her in the discussion.

It's not a total gutting, but if you remember back to the quaking outrage you felt when the Times was acting as Dick Cheney's megaphone, you'll feel at least a little smugness. Listen in on the link above.

Also, there's more to come -- the public editor will be writing about the issue this Sunday.

[buycitgo]

6. thx for this thread

Miller needs to become the Janet Cooke of the election year

others have said it well about her: she's one of the most egregious of the egregious shills who aided and abetted the traitors that brought us this ruinous war

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16922

the long version, above, of just how horrid this squalid hoor has been

and this, from Jack Shafer, who did much to get the word out on the aforementioned indescribable person

Why has the Times postponed its WMD reckoning for so long? It's absurd that during a year in which the media (BBC's Panorama, 60 Minutes, The New Yorker, the Washington Post, the Knight Ridder Washington Bureau, the Los Angeles Times, et al.) busied themselves coring the defectors' stories, the Times has continued to ignore the elephant in the room. This isn't to say the Times hasn't done good work since Miller was reassigned to stories where she can't do any damage. Take, for example, this Feb. 13, 2004, story by Times reporter Douglas Jehl (reprinted in slightly different form in the International Herald Tribune), which lays out the method of the defectors' deceptions and the countermeasures adopted by the CIA. Jehl's article was an excellent chance for the Times to acknowledge, "Hey, we were knuckleheads, just like the administration, but we're going to clean up our act, too" to regain its credibility. Instead, the article only feints at a self-critique and moves on. (Note: I'm not blaming Jehl! I'm blaming his editors.)

Maybe the paper has dragged its feet because such an ex post facto inquiry would have looked like an unfair swipe at the cashiered Howell Raines, during whose watch many of the worst Miller stories ran. Maybe the paper's management didn't relish another public drama so soon after the Blair, Bragg, and Raines affairs and hoped the scandal would blow over. Maybe the Editors' Note will explain.

The forthcoming Editors' Note could break two ways. If it excoriates reporters only, the issue will be black and white: They failed. If the note rebukes Times editors, too, expect a more nuanced critique, something along the lines of the September 2000 "Editors' Note" about Wen Ho Lee. The forthcoming note could even lift language from the Wen Ho Lee edition without missing a beat:

"But looking back, we also found some things we wish we had done differently. … The Times's stories—echoed and often oversimplified by politicians and other news organizations—touched off a fierce public debate. … The Times should have moved more quickly to open a second line of reporting, particularly among scientists inside and outside the government … There are articles we should have assigned but did not. … In those instances where we fell short of our standards in our coverage of this story, the blame lies principally with those who directed the coverage, for not raising questions that occurred to us only later."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2101124/

following along, re: Wen Ho Lee..... Shafer says the Times needs to do a followup along the lines of Mattew Purdy's corrective of THAT ludicrous farce (and what about Jeff Gerth/Whitewater, for that matter?)

don't hold breath

thx again for this thread

wonder if her smirking pieholder will appear again on Larry King

I tried to get through awhile ago, to ask her if she felt she felt like the Tokyo Rose of the INC.

[BillZBubb]

7. Why hasn't the Times canned that BushCo whore?

She lied every step of the way. She was a propaganda mouthpiece for Shrub. She's WORSE than Jason Blair. So much for the "librul" media.