Oh, please. Since when is Judith Miller a judge of what is good journalism?

From working my way through this shrill nonsense, I suspect that the nub of her argument could probably be legitimately supported, whether entirely correctly or not, by someone with the requisite skills and no ideological agenda. I do enjoy her chastising Poynter for not using the precise 9/11 body count (“…and they might have looked up the actual death toll”) while failing to take advantage of at least two opportunities to do so herself. 

Judith Miller criticizing your journalism is like Bernie Madoff saying your investment strategy is suspicious.

I am still waiting for the apology from Ms. Miller to the New York Times readership for the damage she inflicted on that institution and the American public through what she thought was reporting. Her colleagues protected her and they should not have. 

Judith Miller chastising a journalism outfit for ethical lapses is like Charlie Sheen calling Madonna “promiscuous.”

I’m a little surprised Judith Miller can still type with all that blood on her hands. Her uncritical stenography of whatever the Bush administration told her in the runup to the Iraq war is partially responsible for every senseless death that followed.

There’s still some disagreement on a precise number; see Moos’ piece from Sept. 12.
“Why do newspapers use different figures for fatalities of Sept. 11 attacks?”

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/romenesko/145765/why-do-newspapers-use-different-figures-for-fatalities-of-sept-11-attacks/#disqus_thread

“Fox Newser Judith Miller.” Why did I feel a strong urge to quit reading there?

In a related story, Ronald McDonald and Bozo the Clown have accused Poynter of putting on a three-ring circus. Thanks for your input, Judith Miller, now please stop pretending you know anything about ethics or journalism.

I understand, but the point I was making about Miller stands.

Why is everyone here engaging in ad hominem  attacks on Miller instead of responding to her arguments? Is that because they believe that’s the strongest case they can make?

I think its worth weighting the deaths among constituent populations.  Sure Malaria kills millions in Africa, no doubt an horrible affliction, but if terrorists are killing more readers of Poynter than malaria is, then it is certainly worth noting.

Too bad Miller didn’t take a course in journalism ethics a long time ago. Given that, she’s about as much a journalist as Rick Perry is brain surgeon.

No doubt!

You make a very good point. But the response here certainly is not surprising.

Because you have the inherent bias that most lefties have?

And sense when are the faceless posters here the judges?

Faceless, sargeh? 

It demeans what’s left of serious journalism to allow this woman to speak on serious journalism…. why doesn’t she just run and hide somewhere?

I can’t really blame Miller for joining Fox News after the New York Times threw her under the bus. They stood by her as long as they thought they had a shot looking good for the public. They thought the public would see them as heroes for taking a stand for journalists who want to protect confidential sources, and when the public didn’t view the Times in the heroic light they wished for, the Times fired her. The publisher put pressure on her to retire literally a few days after the Times ran an article where she expresses deep gratitude for the publisher’s willingness to stand by her. Both Miller and the Times were responsible for bad reporting and some of the questionable decisions made in Miller’s attempts to protect Libby as a source. Most of us still read the Times, though. Miller has been unfairly made the scapegoat for all the Times’ oversights.