[Marxism] RE: "end with Sulzberger's resignation" [?]
Brian_Shannon at verizon.net
Sun Oct 16 14:48:30 MDT 2005
<Things are going to have to get a lot lot worse for the Times before
Arthur Ochs Sulzberger (Jr? III?) fires himself. The three-page-long
fluff piece made it clear that the family had been grooming Sulzberger
for a couple of decades in various positions inside the corporation,
mostly on the advertising side, and that he was destined by them to run
the corporation for decades more. Look for Clarence Thomas to have an
epiphany and walk out of the Supreme Court before Sulzberger goes.> —
David seems to be entirely correct. Today’s NYTimes has an article that
leaves Judith Miller completely out to dry, while saying almost nothing
about the publisher’s role. It’s a long article and difficult to cherry
pick regarding Miller.
However, here’s a choice one: “Critics said The Times was protecting
not a whistle-blower but an administration campaign intended to squelch
It brings up again how the Times had to distance itself from her
articles supporting the government’s claims regarding WMD:
“Within a few weeks, in one of his first personnel moves, Mr. Keller
told Ms. Miller that she could no longer cover Iraq and weapons issues.
Even so, Mr. Keller said, ‘she kept kind of drifting on her own back
into the national security realm.’
“Although criticism of Ms. Miller’s Iraq coverage mounted, Mr. Keller
waited until May 26, 2004, to publish an editors’ note that criticized
some of the paper’s coverage of the run-up to the war.
“The note said the paper’s articles on unconventional weapons were
credulous. It did not name any reporters and said the failures were
institutional. Five of the six articles called into question were
written or co-written by Ms. Miller.”
The rest of the article basically is that everyone hated Judith Miller.
The most subtle comment may be at the end of the following:
“Ms. Miller’s article on the hunt for missing weapons was published on
July 20, 2003. It acknowledged that the hunt could turn out to be
fruitless but focused largely on the obstacles the searchers faced.
[Thus, even after the failure to find WMD, Miller writes an article
that attempts to cover for the administration ... and herself.]
“Neither that article nor any in the following months by Ms. Miller
discussed Mr. Wilson or his wife.
“It is not clear why. Ms. Miller said in an interview that she ‘made a
strong recommendation to my editor’ that an article be pursued. ‘I was
told no,’ she said. She would not identify the editor.
“Ms. Abramson, the Washington bureau chief at the time, [obviously the
editor referred to] said Ms. Miller never made any such
More information about the Marxism