the "New York Times" Criticizes their own reporting in the environment of the Iraq war
When the readers of the New York Times open their newspaper on Wednesday, one or the other may not have dared his eyes. Because the editorial with the inconspicuous call The Times and Iraq contained confessions of rare species. It is time to say so sweet the leaf, after hundreds of articles published in the area of the Iraq war, now to review their own reporting critical and unbiased.
The result first demanded slightly surprising, because self-analysis found natural "a tremendous amount of journalistic contributions we are proud of." But there was obviously other:
But we are also looking for research that were not so strictly carried out how this had to be. In some cases, information, which appeared at that time, were controversial, and today are fragwurround, not sufficiently qualified and superseded without further research. Turned back, we wish that we had checked some allegations more aggressive when new evidence appeared or dependent.
the "New York Times" regrets in particular to have relyed on Iraqi informants, governmental opponents and exilians whose believeness had been sustainably shaked in the last few days and weeks. Prominent Example is the ahmad Tschalabi, the chairman of the Iraqi national congress, who has provided the newspaper since 1991 with information from exilices and then to a favorite of the "Hard liner" has become within the Bush Administration. Since last week, Tschalabi is no longer standing on the content list (the end of the dark master).
Of the "Times" Nevertheless, it’s not so much about individuals. The self-report is more likely to develop diffuse threat scenarios that have been developed on weeks and months without a demonstrable basis. At the end of 2001, the newspaper quoted an engineer who wanted to have worked up a high-speed in secret plants for the production of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. In September 2002, an article suggested that Saddam Hussein has undertaken efforts to enter the possession of a nuclear bomb, and still spread in April 2003 "Times" The assertion of an Iraqi scientist, chemical and biological weapons were destroyed shortly before the start of the war, Iraq has transported weapons to Syria and are still working together with Al-Qaeda. On this highly doubtful journalistic practice, which is to be abandoned in the future, were not only informants and reporters on site, but also the domestic editors have been involved, rather than skeptically on counter-examination and further research – perhaps too eager, "scoops" to bring into your section.
Even more interesting than the editorial itself is the question of the reasons for the reasons of its emergence and publication. Of the "New York Times", does not believe that the free commitment is hardly damaged, especially as most articles that are accused of the unclean research are falling into the term of office of the Chief Chief Editor Howell Raines. But the self-criticism – not exactly a frequent phenomenon in the media – could initiate a nationwide rethink that the after the 11. September to finish the Bush administered media front end-to-cultivated?
SPIEGEL ONLINE speaks only from one "Remarkable editorial", What roughly corresponds to the Formulation Unusual Critique of the San Jose Mercury News or at least represents at Extraordinary Mea Culpa, as the Guardian suspects. The FAZ ames that the project is the "Times" Only internal consequences will be:
More serious goods, a Bush friendly medium as the news channel ‘Fox News’ decided to follow the example of the newspaper; But that’s hard to wait. The relentless self-criticism of the ztimes® is already rather on the newspaper itself. Their employees were still able to put themselves stronger in stuff, not writing a wrong word than before. If you expect to make mub, sometime be put to the poster from your own employer, who will certainly think about every sentence three times.
The broadcaster Al-Jazira sees the nature a little differently. The article of the Arab news channel will be backed up as a whole, but begins with the elaborate listing "US Paper Apologises for False Iraq Reports" and notes in the end: "The New York Times is the us’ Third Largest Circulation Newspaper Behind USA Today And The Wall Street Journal." Whereas Fox News only the AP message is to be read, which is widespread throughout America and will take over by many press organs.
Overall, the print and online media take the media trapped from the own ranks surprisingly. In Germany, there was hardly anyone as attacked on Wednesday evening as "The world", In the Uwe Schmitt followed some colleagues from the US and the Great Britain and Most claimed that the sudden distance to Ahmad Tschalabi seriously serve the purpose, "to take your reporter Judith Miller from the weft line, which was obvious until recently the connection officer. The all sides of their contacts envied by the author of a bestseller on mass destruction weapons in front of and during the Iraq war their revenues as a tribe expert at CNN. Is indisputable that most of the incriminated articles come from her."
However, Schmitt also had a good explanation for the astonishing circumstance that the self-implication of the "New York Times" No journalistic earthquake excluded:
It gets in the industry where the highest-minded, sometimes condescending tone of ‘Times’ editorial contributed to give clammy joy. Barely. Nobody lives outside the glasshouse.
Nevertheless, someone who sits themselves in the glass house can occasionally throw with stones.
