New York Times (reg. req.) | NPR
“I think they got it right. Mostly,” writes Times public editor Daniel Okrent. “The editors’ note to readers will have served its apparent function only if it launches a new round of examination and investigation. I don’t mean further acts of contrition or garment-rending, but a series of aggressively reported stories detailing the misinformation, disinformation and suspect analysis that led virtually the entire world to believe Hussein had W.M.D. at his disposal.” (Okrent talks about his Sunday column on NPR’s “Weekend Edition.”) Other editors’ note-related pieces:
> Prof disappointed editors’ note was buried, didn’t name names (BaltSun)
> Getler: NYT should have named Judith Miller, other reporters (CNN)
> Note looks like leaky lifeboat launched in teeth of gathering storm (LAT)
> Wasserman: “I find NYT’s admission deeply impressive” (Miami Herald)
> Easterbrook hopes NYT editor won’t be punished for being honest (TNR)
> Rosen on NYT’s Wen Ho Lee note and last week’s WMD note (PressThink)
> Wycliff: “The Times editors’ note made for a delicious irony” (Trib/r.r.)
> Smith: NYT’s flawed WMD reporting worse than Blair’s sins (Albany TU)
> OC Register to intensify screening of NYT News Service stories (OCR/r.r.)
> Editors need to add another layer of skepticism after WMD flap (SDU-T)
What Okrent, other journalists say about NYT editors’ note
