[Kristarrah]

The New York Times won't be printing any retraction any time soon, at least, not until after the election.

I sent a letter to the NYT yesterday and this is the response received:

I appreciate your concerns about The Times's reporting on the explosives missing from the Al Qaqaa site in Iraq. However, I think it is much too early to come to a conclusion that there is error here. I note three factors in particular: NBC News's clarification of their early report; The Times's on-the-record citation of the unit commander who arrived at Al Qaqaa on April 10 asserting that his troops did not conduct a search; and, finally, some mixed signals from the White House.
This story will, I am sure, continue to play out over the next several days. If The Times is indeed in error, that is certain to become clear, and I will say so in print. Until then, I can only suggest that you -- and I -- examine each charge and countercharge very carefully, and examine the evidence fully, before reaching conclusions.

Yours Sincerely,
Daniel Okrent
Public Editor
N.B.: Any opinions expressed here, unless otherwise indicated, are solely my own


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/27/politics/27bomb.html?oref=login
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/26/politics/campaign/26campaign.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/25/international/middleeast/25bomb.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/25/politics/campaign/25cnd-weapons.html

[mplsconservative]

I received the same reply.

This is the part that had me steamed:

"This story will, I am sure, continue to play out over the next several days. If The Times is indeed in error, that is certain to become clear, and I will say so in print."

Sure Okrent, like on November 3rd. What a lying POS!

[Leonora]

That's exactly the one I got. Pathetic.

[snopercod]

If The Times is indeed in error, that is certain to become clear, and I will say so in print.

Yeah, sure. On page E-57, right next to the obits.

[intolerancewillNOTbetolerated]

"If The Times is indeed in error, that is certain to become clear, and I will say so in print."

Of course...afterall, they have always shown the utmost interest in objectivity and truth, and always corrected stories that later were proven to be politically-driven lies...in print...big, front page headlines just like the original story they ran to deliberately mislead readers.

They should just start calling the paper the New York Enquirer.