Miller's Star Fades (Slightly) at 'NY Times'

[DoYouEverWonder]

Editor and Publisher


On Sept. 29, a remarkable story appeared on the front page of The New York Times: "Agency Belittles Information Given by Iraqi Defectors; Pentagon Intelligence Review Says Debriefings Provided Little of Any Value." Far down in Douglas Jehl's report was this mea culpa: "The Iraqi National Congress had made some ... defectors available to ... The New York Times, which reported their allegations about ... the country's weapons programs."

This was a rather direct repudiation of numerous stories written by Judith Miller in the Times for over a year in which she relied upon the INC's Chalabi and defectors he provided for front-page exclusives on supposed weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq. A second front-page Times story on Sept. 29, "New Criticism on Prewar Use of Intelligence," gave credit to The Washington Post for breaking the story about House Intelligence Committee complaints about the CIA.

Has the Gray Lady finally turned the corner and abandoned its dependence on the faulty WMD reporting of Miller in favor of more objective journalism? Alas, this may be as far as the Times will go in executing a critical review of Miller's reporting on the search for WMD over the past year. My communications with several Times employees, past and present, depict some powerful people within the paper as still being in denial. Their rationale is that Miller produces; and that she is uniquely well-connected. A reluctant admirer said: "What Miller does have is unlimited drive and energy for a story, and fabulous sources at the upper levels of government."

But Miller is not a neutral, nor an objective journalist. This can be acceptable, if you're a great reporter, "but she ain't, and that's why she's a propagandist," stated one old Times hand to me.

more...

[teryang]

1. If I were a government insider with an independent view

...I wouldn't send any emails to Judith Miller.