It Didn't Start With Jayson Blair

It's part of a longstanding pattern of ideology over accuracy. Part of that ideology is so-called "diversity," which was apparentl what kept Blair in the Times's employ for so long.

It's not even about ideology IMO - it's about a complete disregard for the journalist ethic of fact-checking. As an example, here is a column from last November by William Safire, their so-called conservative, about Total Information Awareness:

You are a Suspect

If the Homeland Security Act is not amended before passage, here is what will happen to you:

Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every Web site you visit and e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend -- all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as ''a virtual, centralized grand database.''

Only one problem: The Homeland Security Act (HSA) did not mention TIA. Or DARPA, the agency in charge of the project. Nor did it provide for any of the legal or funding mechanisms to create such a database or the data streams. And a project that would capture EVERY purchase in the country would absolutely dwarf the IT preparations for Y2K. As an IT professional working with large marketing databases in the credit card industry, I was so baffled by Safire’s claim that I printed out the text for the HSA and read the whole thing. Twice. NOTHING to substantiate Safire’s claim.

IMO Jayson Blair simply realized that no one was watching and checking out what he was doing and he ran with it. The real problem lies with the management of the NY Times, who should all resign.

CNN just got called on their latest phony story, with a comparison of CNN reporter Zarrella to Jason Blair thrown in by the NRA's Wayne LaPierre. They didn't like it a bit.

Transcript follows:

COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIPS: Viewers are speaking out on a segment we aired yesterday concerning the federal ban on assault weapons. The 1994 ban could expire in September 2004 if Congress doesn't extend it.
Now here's a sampling of your viewer e-mail.
From David in Calhoun, Georgia: "It's not the weapon which has the knockdown power, it's the ammo."
From Andrei in Washington, D.C.: "You made no mention that many Americans legally own fully automatic weapons with a special permit."
And from Jim in San Francisco: "Your sources implied that assault weapons are more powerful than currently legal guns, but it appeared that the only functional distinction was in the size of the clip."
We want to thank our viewers for their feedback and for viewers who didn't watch yesterday, we asked the Broward County, Florida's sheriff's office for a demonstration of the assault weapon. The deputy fired an illegal weapon at cinder blocks and bulletproof vests and you can see the impact here. And then the deputy fired a legal weapon, but the deputy did not fire at the cinder blocks so you could not see similar damage the ammunition would have caused.
Also yesterday on the program former L.A. police chief, Bernard Parks, who's in favor of keeping assault weapons illegal, gave his opinion.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BERNARD PARKS, FORMER L.A. POLICE CHIEF: There's only one reason for it and you cannot hunt with it. It's only one reason and that is that it kills people. It's a military weapon. It should be kept in a military arsenal and out of the domestic society.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIPS: Now we give you the other side from the executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, Wayne LaPierre
Wayne, thanks for being with us.
WAYNE LAPIERRE, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, NRA: Hi, Kyra. Good to be with you.
PHILLIPS: Well, if the ban on assault weapons expires, what kind of weapons would be legal?
LAPIERRE: Kyra, let me say this to start: I'm glad you ran the story because apparently the only difference between "The New York Times" and CNN is that when a reporter for "The New York Times" fakes a story, he's fired, and at CNN he's not.
Your bureau chief, John Zarrella, deliberately faked the story yesterday and intending to show that the performance characteristics of banned firearms on the list are somehow different from the performance characteristics of firearms not on the banned list. He was -- he was implying that these were machine guns or fully automatic guns. That's not true.
PHILLIPS: Mr. LaPierre, I have to stop you there. No one fakes stories at CNN and John Zarrella definitely did not fake a story at CNN. You're very off base. I'm going to let you say your opinion, and let's have a conversation, but don't accuse our reporter of faking any stories, sir.
LAPIERRE: Let me say it again. In front of the whole country, your reporter faked that story yesterday. It deliberately misread...
PHILLIPS: All right, we're going...
LAPIERRE: There's no way it could be true and I challenge CNN to defend it.
PHILLIPS: Well, we're not going to continue this interview because our reporter did not fake...
LAPIERRE: Because you don't want the truth. The truth you don't want out there.
PHILLIPS: OK, that is not true. We did not a fake a story.
LAPIERRE: You ought to register your -- you ought to fill out a lobby form and register.
PHILLIPS: Why don't we ask another question? What are the uses for an assault weapon? Tell me what the uses are for this.
LAPIERRE: Why can't you accept the truth? There is no difference, Kyra, in the performance characteristics of the guns on the banned list and the guns not on the banned list. They don't shoot any faster, they're not more powerful, they're not machine guns, they don't make any bigger holes, all which your reporter, John Zarrella, implied in that story.
PHILLIPS: Let's talk about the ammunition. Folks had problem with the ammunition. We've heard a lot in the last 24 hours from viewers who made the point that it's not the weapons who do the damage, it's the ammo. OK? Can legally be bought, ammunition. Now does this do -- do just as much damage than an illegal weapon?
LAPIERRE: Kyra, they all fire the same ammunition. Why can't you accept the truth? There is no difference in the guns on the banned list and the guns not on the banned list.
Your reporter's story was deliberately misleading the viewers. Bill Clinton deliberately misrepresented the House and the facts to the House of Representatives in the Congress and I don't believe this House of Representatives is going to fall and have the wool pulled over their eyes the way what happened did in '94.
The truth matters. The public needs to hear the truth and the truth is every police officer on the street knows it. There's not a dime worth of difference between the guns on the banned list and the guns off the banned list in terms of their performance characteristics and I challenge CNN again to defend that story to its viewers because it's not true.
PHILLIPS: What do you say...
LAPIERRE: All day yesterday you misled the viewers.
PHILLIPS: What do you say to the members of the law enforcement community that we had on the air who say assault weapons don't belong on the streets?
LAPIERRE: Kyra, I got calls all day yesterday from law enforcement officers going crazy over that story you ran saying it's not true. They were dismayed that there was a law enforcement officer on there lending himself to it.
The story misrepresented the facts. What we need to do to stop crime -- every time you catch a criminal, 100 percent of the time, prosecute him. Put him in prison.
We have all kinds of gun laws. Catch a violent felon with a gun, put him in jail. Catch a violent drug dealer with a gun, put them in jail 100 percent of the time. That's what rank-and-file cops know stops crime. But again, I challenge CNN in the headquarters to take an objective look at that story and defend it because it's simply not true.
PHILLIPS: All right. Executive vice president...
LAPIERRE: "The New York Times" reporter was fired, John Zarrella ought to be fired.
PHILLIPS: Executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, Wayne LaPierre, that's why we are interviewing you today and that's why we're addressing this to show both sides of that story.
And we all stick by John Zarrella and how credible of a reporter he is.
Thank you for your time, sir.
Well, here's your turn to weigh in on this story. Our "Web Question of the Day" is: "Should Congress extend the assault weapons ban?" We'll have the results later in this broadcast. Vote on cnn.com/wolf.

>>It's not even about ideology IMO - it's about a complete disregard for the journalist ethic of fact-checking.

I concur. It's also worth noting that "news" articles these days rarely even attempt to answer the basic "W" questions that used to be considered a staple, known by anyone who ever had Journalism 101 as part of an English class: Who, What, Where, When, etc.

Instead, "news" is all about furthering an agenda, and answering the W's gets in the way.

It Didn't Start With Jayson Blair

If anyone believes that this is an isolated incident, I have another one for you:

Democrat corruption in Palm Beach Florida during Election 2000 was an isolated incident also. Doesn't happen anywhere else.

more info on TIA from EPIC

OK, I'm interested in everyone's opinion.

Should I post this article at that other board that Jim doesn't like us to mention?

I want to know if he bought or sold drugs on Times premises.

Accordingly, wouldn't the DEA have to board up the building like they do any crackhouse?

Don't they seize the assets? They do for citizens.

I was looking forward to all the IT work that would spring up because of it. That's a minimum of hundreds of millions of dollars.

What board is that?....for what purpose?

..........although if it is the one I'm thinking of, you decide. I'm sure the Ministry of Propaganda over there will yank it faster than you can say 'totalitarian'.