- NEW YORK -- The New York
Times donned sackcloth and ashes again yesterday when its ombudsman said
the newspaper had been duped by "the cunning campaign" of those
that wanted the world to believe that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass
destruction.
-
- Some stories, Daniel Okrent said, "pushed Pentagon
assertions so aggressively you could almost sense epaulets on the shoulders
of editors". The half-page critique of the newspaper's coverage during
the run-up to the invasion of Iraq followed a separate admission signed
by "the editors" last week that said the newspaper had not been
as "rigorous as it should have been" in questioning Iraqi exiles.
-
- Mr Okrent said that in the run-up to the invasion, "cloaked
government sources ... insinuated themselves and their agendas into prewar
cov erage". The newspaper's failure, he said, was institutional. "To
anyone who read the paper between September 2002 and June 2003, the impression
that Saddam Hussein possessed, or was acquiring, a frightening arsenal
of WMD seemed unmistakable."
-
- Mr Okrent said much of the inaccurate WMD coverage was
"inappropriately italicised by lavish front-page display and heavy-breathing
headlines". Other stories that had challenged the assertions or tried
to put the claims into perspective "were played as quietly as a lullaby".
-
- In one instance, a story by James Risen - "CIA aides
feel pressure in preparing Iraqi reports" - was completed several
days before the invasion and "unaccountably" held for week. The
report finally appeared three days after the war broke out and was buried
on page 10 of the newspaper's second section.
-
- Many "scoops" based on unsubstantiated revelations
have still to be revisited, the ombudsman said.
-
- Mr Okrent said he hoped the failings would produce not
further contrition, but rather "a series of aggressively reported
stories detailing the misinformation, disinformation and suspect analysis
that led virtually the entire world to believe Hussein had WMD.
-
- "The aggressive journalism that I long for ... would
reveal not just the tactics of those who promoted the WMD stories, but
how the Times was used to further their cunning campaign."
-
- The latest act of self-flagellation has further bruised
the New York Times's reputation. The newspaper is still struggling to recover
from the revelation last year that a reporter, Jayson Blair, invented elements
of dozens of stories.
-
- Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited
2004
- http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1228111,00.html
|
