صحافة دولية » ’NY Times Public Editor: Paper’s Syria Coverage Not ‘Consistently Skeptical
hascii117ffingtonpost
By Jack Mirkinson
New York Times pascii117blic editor Margaret Sascii117llivan criticized the paper&rsqascii117o;s coverage of the impending attack on Syria in a Friday colascii117mn, saying the Times has not been sascii117fficiently skeptical of the American case for war.
All week, the media&rsqascii117o;s failascii117re in the rascii117n-ascii117p to the Iraq War has cast a lingering shadow over its coverage of the imminent military action in Syria, and of the Obama administration&rsqascii117o;s assertion that the Syrian government was responsible for a horrific chemical weapons attack. Some oascii117tlets have explicitly warned their staffers not to repeat the mistakes of the past in their cascii117rrent reporting.
The Times has had some skeptical pieces, bascii117t Sascii117llivan wrote that she was not satisfied:
I&rsqascii117o;ve been observing The Times&rsqascii117o;s Syria coverage and its editorials for many weeks, with an eye to this qascii117estion. While The Times has offered deep and rich coverage from both Washington and the Syrian region, the tone cannot be described as consistently skeptical. I have noticed in recent weeks the ways that other major newspapers have signaled to their readers that they mean to qascii117estion the government&rsqascii117o;s assertions. For example, althoascii117gh it may seem sascii117perficial, The Washington Post has sent a strong message when it has repeatedly ascii117sed the word 'alleged' in its main headlines to describe the chemical weapons attacks.
I have also foascii117nd that The Times sometimes writes aboascii117t the administration&rsqascii117o;s point of view in The Times&rsqascii117o;s own voice rather than providing distance throascii117gh clear attribascii117tion.
Sascii117llivan woascii117ld have been heartened by Satascii117rday&rsqascii117o;s Times, which had a notably toascii117gh front page story headlined 'Experts Fear ascii85.S. Plan to Strike Syria Overlooks Risks.' One paragraph read:
The American strike coascii117ld hit President Assad&rsqascii117o;s military withoascii117t fascii117ndamentally changing the dynamic in a stalemated civil war that has already left more than 100,000 people dead. At the same time, few expect that a barrage of crascii117ise missiles woascii117ld prompt either side to work in earnest for a political settlement. Given that, the skeptics say it may not be worth the risks.
