Skip to comments.NY Times Admits Fabricating News - Again
Posted on 09/25/2005 10:42:45 AM PDT by wagglebee
The mainstream media's newspaper of record admitted late Saturday that one of its reporters fabricated part of a news story on Hurricane Katrina relief.
Saying his paper "flunked" the test of basic journalistic fairness, New York Times public editor Byron Calame said Alessandra Stanley's Sept. 5 report claiming that the Fox News Channel's Geraldo Rivera "nudged" an Air Force relief worker out of the way so he could film himself rescuing a Katrina victim had been made up out of whole cloth.
"Since Ms. Stanley based her comments on what she saw on the screen Sept. 4, the videotape of that segment means everyone involved is looking at exactly the same evidence," Calame noted.
"My viewings of the videotape - at least a dozen times, including one time frame by frame - simply doesn't show me any 'nudge' of any Air Force rescuer by Mr. Rivera," the Times internal watchdog said, adding, "Ms. Stanley declined my invitation to watch the tape with me."
Times editor Bill Keller, however, is still standing by Ms. Stanley's bogus report. He told Calame that she was "writing as a critic, with the license that title brings - [and] was within bounds in her judgment."
"Ms. Stanley's point was that Mr. Rivera was show-boating - that he was being pushy, if not literally pushing - and I think an impartial viewer of the footage will see it that way," Keller insisted.
But Calame countered: "Ms. Stanley certainly would have been entitled to opine that Mr. Rivera's actions were showboating or pushy. But a 'nudge' is a fact, not an opinion. And even critics need to keep facts distinct from opinions."
Stanley's bogus report continues a pattern at the Old Gray Lady of making up the news.
Two weeks ago, columnist Paul Krugman was forced to admit that he falsely claimed media recounts in Florida showed Al Gore winning the 2000 presidential election. In August, a Times profile of Hillary Clinton changed a quote first reported by NewsMax where Clinton said she was "adamantly opposed to illegal immigrants."
In the toned down Times version, Clinton's opposition was to "illegal immigration" rather than the immigrants themselves.
Thank you...that was partly my point. What page was it on? And was it actually a retraction? Clearly it wasn't. The fact that Stanley's editor found nothing wrong with her statement--and clearly said so on the record--basically puts the Times in the position of standing behind it. This latest attempt at a "retraction with retracting" is no different that an Al Goresque apology of "I didn't do it and I won't do it again. It's meaningless and Jerry should continue seeking legal damages.
He finally has an opportunity to burn the Times' ass after years of criticism. I hope he uses it.
It seems the Baltimore SUN is having problems selling thier version of the news as well. For the last several weeks they have been delivering for FREE the Sunday edition to my entire neighborhood. Good thing sunday nite is paper recycle nite.
I hope Rivera sues the pants off the N.Y. Slimes and wins.
Beth, I don't believe that was written by a doctor. The education level of the writer is much too low.
I don't see it that way. I see Cellar's response to Calamity as, "So, she made it up, so what?"
I wonder if anybody else sees it my way, or am I barking mad?
Criminal Number 18F
Thanks, I was just about to call BS. Other than the fact that it is BS what does that post have to do with the origional thread?
Pray for W and Our Iraq Winning Troops
That place is broken. Time for some hippie spray.
Amen you hit the nail on the head. I glad to see that I'm not the only one to feel that way.I'm sorry but I've noticed that attitude for a long long time and I've about had it with their crap.
This "volunteers" story has been all over the email on the net supposedly written by several diffeerent people. Here is what snopes has on this doubtful slander
This lady should be summarily fired...and everyone and anyone should be calling for it!
And the editor dude who is "defending her" should get the sack too!
There is no skirt whatsoever!
Those two are great!
That is one lesson he never made sure Hillary got!
She had her own facts about his endorsement of her, what he said, etc. etc. etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.