Times Reporter Who Resigned Leaves Long Trail of Deception

The New York Times ^ | May 11, 2003

[Jim Noble]

Was Blair Boyd's Toy?

Two days ago I googled Boyd for exactly that reason.

he's married with children, FWIW.

[arthurus]

Sure have been a lot of theese over the last few years.Plus the Eason Jordans who are proud of it.

[arthurus]

hosted on its own petard

The phrase is "Hoist by his own petard."
A petard is a sort of low powered hand grenade.
The grenade gets its name form the French "petard" which is an echoic term for a particular sometimes explosive bodily function that might raise one in one's chair.

[garbanzo]

It is as if the leadership of the mainstream media is congenitally incapable of fault.

It isn't just the mainstream media - any large organization protects the people at the top from anything other than token blame.

[BossLady]

This proves the NYT does not have a fact checker in their midst. If so, this idiot would not have had so much fun duping everyone.

Also, the fact that the NYT did not suspect anything after no expense reports were filed for four months is pretty shady. Maybe the NYT knew more than they are letting on.....

[Miss Marple]

I hope that NOW the people on Free Republic who constantly go off on an anti-Bush rant based on one of these Slimes stories will finally GET A CLUE!!

I have dissected these bogus stories until I am blue in the face, but every time Howell Raines wants to yank the chain of the Right, he has one of his minions grind out another "unnamed sources" story from the White House, the State Department, or the Pentagon. You have to read those stories very carefully and assume that the agenda is being pushed by the unnamed "leakers," who probably are fictitious.

At any rate, the next time one of these pot-stirring, anti-GW, fringe people starts posting something from this paper, I am simply going to assume that it is another "Blair" fiasco, and tell them to go pound sand.

[Pukka Puck]

When you set out to correct a person, make sure you know what you are talking about.

I am well aware of the expression, which just happens to be "hoist WITH his own petard" not "Hoist BY his own petard", I just happened to mistype hoist in my haste to put something down quickly. While I know a bit about words, I am the world's worst speller.

Since it was in the past, it would be hoisted not hoist. Since it was a newspaper, not a person hoisted by its own petard, its was more appropriate than his, IMHO.

I know exactly what a petard is, having looked it up years ago.

"For 'tis the sport to have the enginer / Hoist with his owne petar" -- Shakespeare, Hamlet III iv.

"Hoist" was in Shakespeare's time the past participles of a verb "to hoise", which meant what "to hoist" does now: to lift. A petard (etymology: to fart) was an explosive charge detonated by a slowly burning fuse. If the petard went off prematurely, then the sapper (military engineer; Shakespeare's "enginer") who planted it would be hurled into the air by the explosion. (Compare "up" in "to blow up".) A modern rendition might be: "It's fun to see the engineer blown up with his own bomb."

Of course there are lots of variations on the hoist/petard theme, e.g., this headline and summary in Capitalism Magazine found at http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=839 Hoisted by Their Own Petard and this summary of the same article,
Summary: It is Mr. Gore who was hoisted on his own petard. He who seeks unconstitutional, standardless recounts and tries to delay federal challenges to them, is in no position to complain that time has run out when the federal courts finally rule.

So it is wrong to claim that the phrase is "Hoist by his own petard", since that is neither the original quote from Shakespeare nor the only acceptable version of the quote.

I thank you for your effort to correct what you took for my ignorance and I hope this helps.

In any case, I am delighted that the New York Times are hoist with their own petard, political correctness of the type they champion, for example by supporting Martha Burk in the Masters controversy, blowing up in their faces and surrounding them with a rank smell.

[Pukka Puck]

When you set out to correct a person, make sure you know what you are talking about.

I am well aware of the expression, which just happens to be "hoist WITH his own petard" not "Hoist BY his own petard", I just happened to mistype hoist in my haste to put something down quickly. While I know a bit about words, I am the world's worst speller.

Since it was in the past, it would be hoisted not hoist. Since it was a newspaper, not a person hoisted by its own petard, its was more appropriate than his, IMHO.

I know exactly what a petard is, having looked it up years ago.

"For 'tis the sport to have the enginer / Hoist with his owne petar" -- Shakespeare, Hamlet III iv.

"Hoist" was in Shakespeare's time the past participles of a verb "to hoise", which meant what "to hoist" does now: to lift. A petard (etymology: to fart) was an explosive charge detonated by a slowly burning fuse. If the petard went off prematurely, then the sapper (military engineer; Shakespeare's "enginer") who planted it would be hurled into the air by the explosion. (Compare "up" in "to blow up".) A modern rendition might be: "It's fun to see the engineer blown up with his own bomb."

Of course there are lots of variations on the hoist/petard theme, e.g., this headline and summary in Capitalism Magazine found at http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=839 Hoisted by Their Own Petard and this summary of the same article, Summary: It is Mr. Gore who was hoisted on his own petard. He who seeks unconstitutional, standardless recounts and tries to delay federal challenges to them, is in no position to complain that time has run out when the federal courts finally rule.

So it is wrong to claim that the phrase is "Hoist by his own petard", since that is neither the original quote from Shakespeare nor the only acceptable version of the quote.

I thank you for your effort to correct what you took for my ignorance and I hope this helps.

In any case, I am delighted that the New York Times are hoist with their own petard, political correctness of the type they champion, for example by supporting Martha Burk in the Masters controversy, blowing up in their faces and surrounding them with a rank, smell.

[holden]

Your comments reminded me of my dumbfounded, gaping, aghast revelation as I watched a tech journalist descending upon press kits at a computer convention.

This "professional" journalist raced through the tables, picking up $10-$25-to-prepare company packets of press releases, brochures, etc., seeming oblivious to the concerns of anyone around him. I thought he was flipping out.

Then, with a 24" stack of these, he stood near a trash can to winnow his hoarde, throwing 98% of it into the trash. Of what he was thinking I'm not certain, but it seemed he was muttering about his "areas of interest" or "what I know a lot about," or some such.

He kept a few press releases and a few glossy brochures. He chuckled and said something about "having done [that day's] column." I don't think he intended even to stop by the booths of the vendors whose press releases he had kept, though I quit following him around after that exposure to a "professional journalist" at work.

HF

[arthurus]

blowing up in their faces and surrounding them with a rank smell.

I like that figure very much.

[Ironword]

Uh, isn't Jayson Blair following in the grand tradition established by Walter Duranty?

Don't forget the NYT's Matthew Jeffries.

It's nothing new at the NYT . . . every day is propaganda.

[Grampa Dave]

My motto is: any so called conservative who uses an NY Slimes Article/Oped to bash the president, Powell, or Rummy or to stir up stuff, is not a real conservative. You have to wonder if they are moles with NY Slimes connections and part of the smear GW left wing team.

Same goes for articles from Reuters or AFP posted by the losers of the third party Axis of Whiners who would like to be the Evil Axis. However, all they can do so whine and try to mislead.

[freedomlover]

The widespread fabrication and plagiarism represent a profound betrayal of trust and a low point in the 152-year history of the newspaper.

Uuuuuhh, to have a low point you have to have subsequent improvement.

[DPB101]

Well, they no longer recall them to the Kremlin for show trials and banishment to the Gulag, so there must be some other reason

Allen Myerson and Agis Salpukas--the two New York Times writers to commit suicide last year-- covered Enron before the company collapsed

[John Lenin]

Say it isn't so , what a bunch of Clymers.

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

Mr. Blair must be confused and hurt. After all, he was just following company policy, immitating his peers.

One could wonder if the NY Times editor is using Blair as a scapegoat to distract us from the NYT's own recent record of daily deceitful, anti-war coverage. Regularly using Baghdad Bob as a source was unwise. Raines got caught on the wrong side of the war. His anti-American, anti-Bush campaign failed. He bashes Blair. Not a very manly Clymer, is he?

[gg188]

For each one that is caught, how many are getting away with it? 100?

This guy is probably p.o.'d....He's thinking I got canned while Doris Kearns Goodwin is bigger than ever.

Liberals admire skilful lying. Look at how they love Clinton. They just don't like those who bungle it and get busted.

[rvoitier]

"The widespread fabrication and plagiarism..."

At best, it's incompetent management not to know what was going on and the editors should be fired. At worst, it was known and deliberate.

[Lancey Howard]

The Times regrets that it did not detect the journalistic deceptions sooner. A separate internal inquiry, by the management, will examine the newsroom's processes for training, assignment and accountability.

I'll make sure to look for your next insulting, patronizing editorial defense of "affirmative action", too.
You scumbags.

[Beck_isright]

It's the evil GOP's fault. If they had not instituted a tax cut and had added funding for minority journalist education in the nation's schools, this never would have happened.

I look for that spin any second now.