FAME AND INFAMY AT THE NEW YORK TIMES

WHEN A ROCK STAR REPORTER gets in bed with her um “sources,” readers get screwed [story]  The New York Times may be screwed if it doesn’t find some um distance from Judith Miller.  Her lack of credibility and The Times inability even now to separate her interests from the toliet paper’s interest mean The Times will continue to take it up the um editorial chain of command.  A question for Bill Keller.  Just who is in charge at that dive?  The spawn of Punch or Judy?  A few  questions from Jay Rosen make you wonder:

What combination of things prevents the New York Times from telling us more right now? Again we don’t know, and the Times isn’t telling. The only explanation we have is: “…the paper had been wary of revealing too much about the case for fear of compounding Ms. Miller’s legal problems.” It feels constrained because the Fitzgerald investigation goes on. Which works for why Miller is not divulging her testimony.

But would it explain why the columnists have been silent on the case since her release?  Would it tell us why the Times hasn’t covered the reaction and controversy in journalism circles over the terms of Miller’s release?  Does it make you curious that Keller has written no editor’s note about the glaring inability of the paper to tell us what it knows, or even do normal journalism? Do you understand why none of the bosses in this photograph has gone on television to explain how the paper is handling the Miller case and what it sees as the lesson, the stakes? They know Charlie Rose’s table is waiting.  And even if we could explain Keller’s reticence with “not making more trouble for Miller” (doesn’t make sense to me, but…); and even if we did understand why the columnists and media reporters and legal correspondents have fallen silent (doesn’t make sense to me, but…) we would still have to explain why the public editor, Byron Calame, whose whole job is to represent readers, sees no reason even to mention the matter in this Sunday’s column or at his web journal, which were invented for this very reason

 

JUDITH MILLER MAY GO DOWN yet for perjury in the Valerie PlameOut.  The old Gray Lady called The Times may go down as well.  The saddest whores to see are the old ones.

DID SOMEOBODY SAY MONEY? [Steve Soto/ The Left Coaster]  . . .perhaps we can also ask if Keller is being quiet because he is getting a cut of Miller’s purported $50,000 per appearance speaking feesJane Hamsher notes over at FireDogLake, they now know that she has lied to them about when she first “met” Scooter. through the end of 2007? Yes, the Times says that Miller does not have speaking engagements on her calendar through 2007, but that assumes that Miller will be at the Times, doesn’t it? After all, as

THE HERETIK KNOWS money doesn't talk, it screams.  What money screams here is sell out.

Comments

[eRobin]

If Judy gets sent up for perjury ... I can't even imagine what the NYT will do. I mean after Step One: pretend it isn't happening and Step Two: write delusional editorials on her behalf.