------------------------
Email: alvrdb-brt@yahoo.com
URL:
Comments:Abby,
No response from anyone at the Times. Wrote another article on Dailykos with the Times target of my criticism, but I carefully read the DOJ report and understand how you could have been confused, as they began by describing the plane as " large remote controlled aircraft" and that could have been confused with an actual drone aircraft.and only later use the words,"Ferdaus stated that he planned to attack the Pentagon using aircraft similar to "small drone airplanes" filled with explosives and guided by GPS equipment"
I assume the caption on the photo was yours, and not from the DOJ. as you appear to have assumed that it was a full size airplane. I may be the only one on this right now, and I'm a N.Y. Times fan. The article should have a correction added that clears up any confusion.
The integrity of this paper means more than any employee, executive or reader. So, let's acknowledge that there was confusion, and by doing so preserve the Times reputation.
Here's the dailykos essay
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/05/1022865/-NYTimes-circles-the-wagons?showAll=yes&via=blog_475686
If your article was misleading, so was the DOJs release, which raises other serious issues. I don't want to let this drop for reasons I allude to in my essay, as we all must learn from this.
Al Rodbell
--- On Wed, 10/5/11, Goodnough, Abby wrote:
From: Goodnough, Abby
Subject: RE: READER MAIL: Abby Goodnough
To: " alvrdb-brt@yahoo.com " < alvrdb-brt@yahoo.com >
Date: Wednesday, October 5, 2011, 2:50 PM
Dear Mr. Rodbell,
Thank you for your e-mails. I read your post on dailykos. You are correct about the fact that the undercover agents did not directly provide Ferdaus with a plane; they gave him the money for it. We are running a correction on this.
I don't, however, believe any other correction is warranted. I did not assume it was a large airplane and don't believe the story implies that.
Best, Abby Goodnough
---------------------------------------------
From: Al Rodbell
[mailto: alvrdb-brt@yahoo.com ] Thank you for your e-mails. I read your post on dailykos. You are correct about the fact that the undercover agents did not directly provide Ferdaus with a plane; they gave him the money for it. We are running a correction on this.
I don't, however, believe any other correction is warranted. I did not assume it was a large airplane and don't believe the story implies that.
Best, Abby Goodnough
---------------------------------------------
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 11:18 PM
To: Goodnough, Abby
Cc: nytimes, public
Subject: RE: READER MAIL: Abby Goodnough
Abby
Goodnough
Reporter,
N.Y. Times
Dear
Ms. Goodnough
Thanks
for your response.
You
wrote " I did not assume it was a large airplane and don't believe
the story implies that."
You may
know what you assumed, but a writer is always the worst person to know what
an audience will infer. This is dependent on their background
knowledge,mindset and specific knowledge of the subject. Anyone who had
seen a news report, almost all of them using the term model or toy planes,
would not be confused at all. But those who had not, like myself, and
others whom I sent a link of your article,, asking "what is the
approximate wingspan of the plane, 5 ft or 50ft?" were not clear that it
was closer to five feet. I can send you the exchange of letters if
interested.
To
understand my motivation for pursuing this you may want to read this article that was the only comprehensive defense of the recent N.Y. Times piece on
Darrell Issa that appeared in his California
congressional district.(article posted below, from The Coast News) I predicated it on the inherent accuracy of
the N.Y. Times, which makes me feel I have a right, and an obligation to
ensure that this trust continues to be justified.
I
suggest you read again the comment by user G2Geek, who, based on other
comments, seems to have expertise in this area of counter terrorism. He
explains the potential public harm of your article leading/allowing some to
believe it was a full size drone,
I have
no desire to personally criticize you, as your reporting should not be
evaluated on any single article. Since the DOJ report was unclear, and
you were constrained by quoting their ambiguous words, even though you
understood that it was a small plane, the article was, in fact, confusing to,
at the least, some of your readers.
A close
reading of the DOJ press release shows the conflicting purposes of their
report; assuring the public that there never was a real danger, yet by
calling the weapon a "large remote controlled aircraft filled with C-4
plastic explosives." pointing out the massive harm that was averted. The
report describes the drone in two different places once as "large"
and later as "small" reflecting their mixed message that while
there never was a danger, it was a really big danger that there never was!.
The
caption of the photo is clearly misleading. If it was supplied by the
Times, this too should be corrected. Rather than " A model of an
F-86 drone, a real version of which was reportedly given to the suspect, it
should read,something like " A model of an F-86 drone like to the one reported
procured by the accused" This single additional correction would
clear up any remaining ambiguity.
I have
copied this exchange of emails to the public editor whom I had emailed
previously
Regards
Al
Rodbell
Encinitas
CA
----------------
I see what you mean about the photo
caption, which I did not write or even see until now. I’ve told the
editors we should run a correction.
Thanks, Abby
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
If you know that a major newspaper is about to do an article that is part of a series on Congressional corruption, you could work with the reporter to make sure it’s accurate. The other strategy is to refuse to answer any questions, trusting that errors would seep through that could be used to refute the entire article as an irresponsible smear. This was Representative Issa’s strategy, and it looks like it worked.
Not only has the substance of the article been overshadowed by his claim that the article was libelous, but it has made most local media gun shy about reporting another newsworthy story.
The series of articles (available from the Time’s website) had included two legislators from each party to make the larger point; the individuals being examples of the damage that was done by the current lax ethical norms. The other featured legislators engaged in a dialog with the paper to improve accuracy; only Issa refusing to even respond to phone calls.
As chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Issa has the broad authority to look at every aspect of our vast federal government. In such a forest of agencies there is abundant low hanging fruit; some such as the ill conceived Mexican gun running sting approved under the Obama administration, and others of vastly greater importance, that represent endemic corruption of both parties by powerful special interests such as the financial industry.
In 2008 the repeal or lack of enforcement of laws overseeing financial institutions brought our country, and the world, to the brink of financial collapse. One company representative of this industry, Goldman Sachs, not only survived, but benefited greatly from the TARP bailout that was initiated under the Bush administration and continued under Obama.
In order to prevent such a disaster from occurring again, the “Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010” was signed, which has become one of the targets for repeal or evisceration by the new Republican majority in the house, with the effort lead by Issa’s committee.
The very day that the Times article came out, Atlantic Monthly Online disclosed a relationship between Issa and Goldman Sachs. Going beyond the corrupting effect of battalions of lobbyists and unlimited campaign contributions, Issa seems to have pushed the envelope. He hired a lawyer who had been a vice president of Goldman Sachs under the name of Peter Simonyi to be in charge of writing revisions of the 2010 law. The reason this was not known to the public is that he had subsequently changed his name to Peter Haller.
The New York Times can ignore spurious accusations of libel, but smaller media outlets are hesitant to incur the wrath of a powerful legislator threatening lawsuits who is one of the wealthiest members of Congress.
So, we can be sure that the Union Tribune, on whose pages the libel claim appeared, will not follow up with a challenge that Issa actually initiate such a suit-or withdraw the accusation; as the Times, after correcting two items, has defended the substance of its article.
The Supreme Court under the recent Citizens United case has opened the floodgates of corporate wealth dominating campaign advertising. We know that corporations such as Goldman Sachs can finance the ads that inundate us during elections, but we didn’t know that one of their recent executives was drafting the laws under which they will operate.
North Coast San Diego now has a member of Congress with the power to make a difference in political life. This gives us, the voters, the potential to influence the direction of the committee that he chairs — whether it shall be focused on partisan gains for next election, or on reforming the endemic corruption of government that threatens us as a nation.
This is the ever-greater historical challenge, one that will only be undertaken if we, Issa’s constituents, demand it.
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------
Our New Congressman -
OpEd from The Coast News, Encinitas CA- Sept 1, 2011 -- assumes that N.Y. Times article is accurate.
Under the new redistricting for the House of
Representatives, the cities of Carlsbad and Encinitas will have a new
incumbent for the next election. The last thing that Issa wanted was to
have his new constituents introduced to him by a critical article in the
left leaning New York Times.
If you know that a major newspaper is about to do an article that is part of a series on Congressional corruption, you could work with the reporter to make sure it’s accurate. The other strategy is to refuse to answer any questions, trusting that errors would seep through that could be used to refute the entire article as an irresponsible smear. This was Representative Issa’s strategy, and it looks like it worked.
Not only has the substance of the article been overshadowed by his claim that the article was libelous, but it has made most local media gun shy about reporting another newsworthy story.
The series of articles (available from the Time’s website) had included two legislators from each party to make the larger point; the individuals being examples of the damage that was done by the current lax ethical norms. The other featured legislators engaged in a dialog with the paper to improve accuracy; only Issa refusing to even respond to phone calls.
As chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Issa has the broad authority to look at every aspect of our vast federal government. In such a forest of agencies there is abundant low hanging fruit; some such as the ill conceived Mexican gun running sting approved under the Obama administration, and others of vastly greater importance, that represent endemic corruption of both parties by powerful special interests such as the financial industry.
In 2008 the repeal or lack of enforcement of laws overseeing financial institutions brought our country, and the world, to the brink of financial collapse. One company representative of this industry, Goldman Sachs, not only survived, but benefited greatly from the TARP bailout that was initiated under the Bush administration and continued under Obama.
In order to prevent such a disaster from occurring again, the “Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010” was signed, which has become one of the targets for repeal or evisceration by the new Republican majority in the house, with the effort lead by Issa’s committee.
The very day that the Times article came out, Atlantic Monthly Online disclosed a relationship between Issa and Goldman Sachs. Going beyond the corrupting effect of battalions of lobbyists and unlimited campaign contributions, Issa seems to have pushed the envelope. He hired a lawyer who had been a vice president of Goldman Sachs under the name of Peter Simonyi to be in charge of writing revisions of the 2010 law. The reason this was not known to the public is that he had subsequently changed his name to Peter Haller.
The New York Times can ignore spurious accusations of libel, but smaller media outlets are hesitant to incur the wrath of a powerful legislator threatening lawsuits who is one of the wealthiest members of Congress.
So, we can be sure that the Union Tribune, on whose pages the libel claim appeared, will not follow up with a challenge that Issa actually initiate such a suit-or withdraw the accusation; as the Times, after correcting two items, has defended the substance of its article.
The Supreme Court under the recent Citizens United case has opened the floodgates of corporate wealth dominating campaign advertising. We know that corporations such as Goldman Sachs can finance the ads that inundate us during elections, but we didn’t know that one of their recent executives was drafting the laws under which they will operate.
North Coast San Diego now has a member of Congress with the power to make a difference in political life. This gives us, the voters, the potential to influence the direction of the committee that he chairs — whether it shall be focused on partisan gains for next election, or on reforming the endemic corruption of government that threatens us as a nation.
This is the ever-greater historical challenge, one that will only be undertaken if we, Issa’s constituents, demand it.
Al Rodbell is an Encinitas resident.
Read more of Mr. Rodbell’s work at Alrodbell.blogspot.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comment pending approval