Responding to complaints over a New York Times report that purported to cite "a recent assessment by the International Atomic Energy Agency that Iran's nuclear program has a military objective," New York Times Public Editor Arthur Brisbane has written that the complaints were just, and that the New York Times should correct the story.
Brisbane wrote: "I think the readers are correct on this. The Times hasn't corrected the story but it should because this is a case of when a shorthand phrase doesn't do justice to a nuanced set of facts. In this case, the distinction between the two is important because the Iranian program has emerged as a possible casus belli." In other words: it's important to get this right, because getting it wrong unjustly promotes the cause of war. As of this writing -- eight hours after the Public Editor's post, six days after the original article appeared, and people first complained about it -- there is still no correction. In other contexts -- not linked to the fervent desire of some people for military confrontation with Iran -- the Times purports to be quite punctilious about corrections, as when it corrected a misidentified character from an animated children's TV show. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/on-iran-iaea-reporting-co_b_1197905.html -- Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org [email protected] _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
