Some Veteran Journalists Say 'Times' And 'Post' Should Have Disclosed Meet

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001738089

Word that members of the Bush administration met with editors of two major newspapers in an effort to stop the publication of news articles in recent weeks drew little surprise from veteran Washington journalists, who said such White House pressure has appeared during past decades.

What concerned some, however, was that The New York Times and The Washington Post did not disclose those meetings when they eventually published the articles involved.

"What strikes me is that neither of the papers have reported it," said John Walcott, Washington bureau chief for Knight Ridder. "They agreed to go into it on White House ground rules that the meetings would be off the record. I don't know why the papers accepted that condition."

Andy Alexander, Washington bureau chief for Cox Newspapers, agreed. "You should report it with the story," he said. "It gets into the agreement you have with the White House as to what you can report."

[Hissyspit]

1. Full disclosure? Can you say 'no, duh!'? n/t

[Kiouni]

2. For an Administration

that is so blatantly against the media you would think that they would be more up front with these kinds of issues. They new this for a year and didn't say a word. how much did that cost i wonder. When the VP will only go on FOX news for discussions the rest of the media should notice. When their reporters are grilling him over the wire taps you think the execs would listen in. but they wait for some other source to break it so they can get it through the AP and not piss of 'ol GW.

[EFerrari]

8. Welcome to DU, Kiouni

:hi:

[EFerrari]

3. Presstitutes. And you called us "internet conspiracy theorists".

Well, looks like us "internet conspiracy theorists" had your number and also, like you did your best to discredit us rather than just report the news.

What a pathetic mess you are.

[Warren Stupidity]

4. Remember when we laughed at Baghdad Bob?

Can somebody explain to me exactly why we found his absurd stenography laughable and yet we take our pathetic 'newz' media seriously? Who the fuck are we kdding? Oh yeah, Kute Katie has better hair and makeup than good old Baghdad Bob, but that is about it.

[gratuitous]

5. Why shouldn't the boss call in misbehaving employees?

More business school tactics from our MBA president. When your employees aren't performing, you call them in for a little "off the record" chat to discuss their erring ways.

Then you write up a memo and stick it in their personnel file.

[Blue_Tires]

6. it just goes from bad to worse

[baby_mouse]

7. Why are journalists "veterans"? ??? (curious is all)

This is a bit of US lingo I don't get, being a limey. I've heard it used more than once, I'm sure.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

9. They are long-term journalists....therefore they are "veteran"...

...journalists. Another example: a long-term police officer is known as a "veteran" police officer. This has nothing to do with the military and/or military service.

[baby_mouse]

10. yeah, the long-term thing I see, but I also thought...

...that there was a connotation of the veteran being involved in something particularly difficult and so able to impart wisdom. You wouldn't become a "veteran" manicurist no matter how long you've done it. The soldier and police officer I can see, but not the journalist... Maybe it's just because in Britain journalists are widely regarded as slightly scummy and liable to make things up...