Over the past few years the NY Times has lost its credibility. They allowed the Jason Blair incident; they became the mouth for the White House via Judith Miller in the run up to Iraq; and now they've helped screw up the lives of the falsely accused Duke LaCrosse players...

Will they print a retraction to their Duke Story?

I rarely go to the NY Times for my news, and doubt I'll return.

Meh, to me the NYTimes is like the ol' Churchill quote about Democracy.

It's the worst newspaper, except for all the other ones.

A retraction? They largely reported the facts: duke players were ACCUSED of rape by a stripper. What was not factual about the reporting?

The NYT has been the best source of news since I started reading it as a kid in the 50s. They pull talent from the intellectual, literary and artistic capitol of the country, and in turn influence that culture. You can bad mouth the paper all you want, but the Churchill quote still stands. Just read the wordy reportage and self-absorbed drivel in the Washington Post, for comparison.

A retraction? They largely reported the facts: duke players were ACCUSED of rape by a stripper. What was not factual about the reporting?
I don't have the article, but from what I recall it was pretty damning...

I look at trends and this seems to be a failure that's getting repeated at the NY Times.

I don't have the article, but from what I recall it was pretty damning...

I look at trends and this seems to be a failure that's getting repeated at the NY Times.

I still think you're fortunate that the other Duke Rape thread got.................lost. :)

Most media tries cases before they ever hit the courts--- especially when they must compete on the internet, and the concept of a "deadline" is no longer relevant. I get your point, but the real issue was the nutbag DA--- and the rush to judgment. Accusing anyone of rape is rather damning.

What do you suppose is a good example of journalism? Faux News?

I don't have the article, but from what I recall it was pretty damning...

I look at trends and this seems to be a failure that's getting repeated at the NY Times.

My guess is that the very first report, the very first airing of the Jason Blair case came from the NYTimes themselves. If anything, the Jason Blair incident should affirm their credibility. They dedicated an entire front page column to EXPOSING their own reporters failings and further stories explaining the chain of events that lead to his firing. They were literally upfront about taking responsibility.
Clearly, they hold themselves to a higher standard of truth than our administration.
I still don't understand what you think they did wrong as far as reporting on the case. Was reporting on the case a mistake in the first place?

I've been getting my news from the National Inquirer (http://www.nationalenquirer.com/). A much better rag than the NYT or Washington Post.

The NYT has been the best source of news since I started reading it as a kid in the 50s. They pull talent from the intellectual, literary and artistic capitol of the country, and in turn influence that culture. You can bad mouth the paper all you want, but the Churchill quote still stands. Just read the wordy reportage and self-absorbed drivel in the Washington Post, for comparison.

That doesn't excuse their crappy reporting. That may have been in the past, but it doesn't mean it applies to today. Those are some pretty BIG "mistakes."

I'm taking a shot at the NYTimes cause they've lost their moral compass...

The NY Times is held to perhaps the highest standard and these mistakes have let their readers like yourself down. What are they doing to fix these problems?

My guess is that the very first report, the very first airing of the Jason Blair case came from the NYTimes themselves. If anything, the Jason Blair incident should affirm their credibility. They dedicated an entire front page column to EXPOSING their own reporters failings and further stories explaining the chain of events that lead to his firing. They were literally upfront about taking responsibility.
Clearly, they hold themselves to a higher standard of truth than our administration.
I still don't understand what you think they did wrong as far as reporting on the case. Was reporting on the case a mistake in the first place?

If the Jason Blair incident was the only incident I wouldn't be saying a word. These are fundamental problems that probably reside with their editors.

The NY Times wields tremendous power. Most of the Sunday papers in this country wait until they get their copy of the Sunday NY Times before they print their final edition. Since there seems to be a problem at the NY Times, that problem then gets compounded 10 fold.

I used to go to the NY Times first, but now I actually go to Rawstory, then the Wapo, then the NY Times... I rarely find anything at the NY Times ground breaking anymore. Quite sad really.

I don't have the article, but from what I recall it was pretty damning...

I look at trends and this seems to be a failure that's getting repeated at the NY Times.

As of yesterday its still in their special section on the incident, but with Corrections

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/25/us/25duke.html?ex=1176609600&en=d4980c1469421ff8&ei=5070

The subtitle states:
"An examination of the case file shows that there is a body of evidence to support the prosecutor�s decision to take the matter to a jury"

Gotta vote with Spydey on this one

b21

With Spydie and the Duke case? Do you have some sort of dog in this hunt or what? You're harping on this more than Bush lately.