The defecation has buffeted the rotating air circulator

Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
The New York Times, while becoming a liberal rag in the last decade, is the source. It has 150+ years of leading edge, cut-throat journalism and is the standard bearer for daily newspapers worldwide.

Until last week.

A story broke about a staff reporter who has been making up stories & plagarising others. They've known about it for almost a year & allowed it to continue. You can read about it here

Now, there are additional reports
At least two more NY TIMES reporters are being investigated for possible journalistic irregularities, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned... MORE...

Reporters and editors, furious at executive editor Howell Raines, have quietly started a 'work slow-down'...
Click to expand...
.

and the feds are beginning to get involved
Prosecutor Seeks Information on Resigned Times Reporter
Click to expand...
NY Times

To top it off, the brass is doing they can to cover their ass, which must have prompted todays get together at the Loew's Astor Theater.

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX TUE MAY 13, 2003 19:48:58 ET XXXXX

EMERGENCY MEETING CALLED AT OLD GRAY LADY; NY TIMES NEWSROOM IN CRISIS

[DRUDGE OBTAINED THIS INTERNAL E-MAIL TO NY TIMES STAFF]

Howell, Gerald and Arthur request that you join your newsroom colleagues at an open forum at 2:30 p.m. Wednesday, May 14, to discuss the Jayson Blair matter and anything else you might have on your mind. The meeting will be held at the Loew's Astor Theater, the moviehouse just behind The Times on 44th Street at Broadway, across from Carmine's. Doors open at 2:15 p.m.

Please be sure to bring your Times i.d. card. No one will be admitted to the theater without their Times i.d.

You will be able to ask questions from the floor, or write them on cards that will be distributed at the door. In addition, we have set up an email address -- [email protected] -- where you can send questions, either in advance of the session or afterward.

On Wednesday morning, we will send out a separate email advising correspondents and bureaus outside New York how they may dial into the forum and listen to the session. Unfortunately, because of the short time available to set up the forum, people listening from a remote location will not be able to ask live questions. You may, however, avail yourself of the email address above. If you get questions to us before 2 p.m. EDT tomorrow, we will put them into the hopper. Otherwise, they will be answered later.
Click to expand...

Looks like it's time to baton down the hatches for what may prove to be one hell of a bumpy ride.

How does one recover it's hard won, long term reputation, lost in a matter of seconds, when they were the perpetrators? It's time to watch & learn. It is sure to be a good show.
 
I don't think I know anyone who believes everything the papers say, after all they're in it to sell papers and make money. Sensationalist crap does that. Of course the bosses are trying to cover their asses, after all they likely encouraged the atmosphere in which these incidents took place. :shrug:
 
Remember, you must never believe that they kept him on staff because he was black. :disgust2:
 
You haven't been following the story? I don't have time to look up other sources right now, but Jayson Blair is a black man, and has evidently been a problem for some time. Many people in the press feel that the only reason he wasn't fired long ago is because of his race. The Times of course denies this, but I wonder. I think it's another PC deal. I read the Times, so I've been following up the story a little.
 
Personally, I suspect they were far more afraid of the press coverage and fallout if they didn't try to make this go away quietly than they were of a race-based employment law suit. Unfortunately for them, it bit them in the ass this time.

I knew he was black, but I don;t think the race-warriors are in on this one.
 
Well, it's gonna be a rough ride, but the Times did the best thing they could IMO... come clean with (supposedly) the whole story and lay it on the table.

Of course, if you believe they've known about it and have been covering it up for years, then I'm not sure a last minute display of integrity matters much.

Will be interesting to watch no doubt.
 
HomeLAN said:
I knew he was black, but I don;t think the race-warriors are in on this one.
Click to expand...
They aren't, I hope because they realize this guy is an ass. If, and it's a big if, the Times kept him on simply to keep racial quotas up, that's unfortunate. I believe they had an idea of what was going on, but I also believe that they fired him as soon as they had concrete evidence. In the real world, that's all you can do. I just find it interesting, in today's politically correct climate, how infrequently this is brought up. Watch for the book tour and the made for tv movie....
 
chcr said:
Remember, you must never believe that they kept him on staff because he was black.
Click to expand...

Kept that out of the opening monologue onpurpose :D

The argument is they retained him because of PC & affirmative action-he was hired during a blitz of minority hirings. I haven't been following the race thing too much because it's too easy.

Coloring the News
 
chcr said:
Remember, you must never believe that they kept him on staff because he was black. :disgust2:
Click to expand...

Nope. They kept him on staff because he had his nose up the right person's ass. He was the 'protege' of the #2 person in the editorial department...

Funny how race came into play only after chcr brought it up...:disgust: Only proves that black folks can kiss ass just as well as some white folks. :disgust:
 
Gato_Solo said:
Funny how race came into play only after chcr brought it up...
Click to expand...
In here, true...on the radio it's the hot topic-was he kept because of race or ???
 
He may have been hired because of his race (not a point of debate, IMO), but he was kept because of his connection to the brass. That was stated quite openly by the folks who worked with him. Of course, folks saw he was black, and automatically assumed something that wasn't there. Besides...most black folks in that situation are the freshest hires, so, according to most every union, who is the easiest, and best, person to fire? :rolleyes:
 
Side note Gato. And in no way directing this at the running topic. As a black man, do you find that you automatically look for racism when you hear that a black man was involved in something? Serious question here. Everytime the gov't does anything here, the french are all over it looking for an angle.
 
Gonz said:
In here, true...on the radio it's the hot topic-was he kept because of race or ???
Click to expand...
That's where I heard it. The reason I brought it up, was that so many of the print media stories I read about it either ignored or skirted the issue. I agree with Gato that the why he was hired question is a non-issue, but I wonder if the brown nose stuff is the whole story. Of course the Times is going to try to make it look like race had nothing to do with keeping him on, even though he was a problem employee, IMO. It might be the truth, we'll never know.
 
There was an e-mail from a city editor dated back in 2002 that said to fire his ass...he got promoted to national instead, that's why, IMO, the race issue was brought up in the first place.
 
Typical large corporation procedure, promote problem people to someone elses department.
 
Nope. Only when somebody says the opposite...like what chcr said. If someone assumes that a person was given favored status for their screwups because they were black, then, unless I am personally involved and know it to be true, then I get defensive.

Back to why I disagreed with chcr...

If his co-workers said he was kept on because he was black, then you'd have something. I don't recall hearing that on a news program. I only heard that he was 'protected' because of his 'sponsor'.
 
RAINES: 'Does that mean I personally favored Jayson? Not consciously. But you have a right to ask if I, as a white man from Alabama, with those convictions, gave him one chance too many by not stopping his appointment to the sniper team. When I look into the truth of that, the answer is yes'...

'You view me as inaccessible and arrogant... You believe the newsroom staff is too hierarchical, that my ideas get acted on and others get ignored. I heard that you were convinced there's a star system that singles out my favorites for elevation'...
Click to expand...

Post
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top