Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

`NYT has second thoughts about “Sharia smear” on Obama'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
foo_bar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:31 AM
Original message
`NYT has second thoughts about “Sharia smear” on Obama'
Thank you, Clark Hoyt. The public editor (ombudsman) of the New York Times has torn apart Edward Luttwak’s op-ed piece on Barack Obama supposedly being a Muslim apostate, right in the Grey Lady’s pages. In his Public Editor column on Sunday, Hoyt called it “a single, extreme point of view” and said the NYT should not simply publish opinion pieces based on patently false facts. We blogged about this last week when a leading Muslim scholar refuted Luttwak’s article. Luttwak is a military historian and conservative analyst of strategic issues who has advised the U.S. military, National Security Council and State Department. He lists his fields of expertise as “geoeconomics, strategy and national strategies and military policies” but not Islam.

“The Times Op-Ed page, quite properly, is home to a lot of provocative opinions,” Hoyt wrote. “But all are supposed to be grounded on the bedrock of fact. Op-Ed writers are entitled to emphasize facts that support their arguments and minimize others that don’t. But they are not entitled to get the facts wrong or to so mangle them that they present a false picture.”

Hoyt said he consulted five Islamic scholars at U.S. universities and “all of them said that Luttwak’s interpretation of Islamic law was wrong.” When the Times asked Luttwak to defend his view, he sent them an analysis of it by an unnamed scholar of Muslim law. He disagreed with Luttwak so strongly that he wrote to him: “You seem to be describing some anarcho-utopian version of Islamic legalism, which has never existed, and after the birth of the modern nation state will never exist.”

http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/06/02/nyt-has-second-thoughts-about-sharia-smear-on-obama/


As a blogger, I'm hardly in a position to dispute Luttwak's right to opine on matters about which he knows nothing. But if I were the editor of an op-ed page and I were interested in publishing a provocative opinion piece grounded in an interpretation of Islamic law, I would try to get a scholar of Islamic jurisprudence to write it. But of course if I were the editor of an op-ed page, I would think that one of my goals was to publish articles that inform, rather than mislead, my audience. The actual op-ed editors at the NYT and Washington Post have, however, made it abundantly clear over the years that they see misleading their audience as fine -- hence men like Bill Kristol and Charles Krauthammer get hired as columnists.

http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/where_facts_are_madeup.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
billyoc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:32 AM
Response to Original message
1. Subscribers have second thoughts about NYTimes
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
2. let me be the first to recommend this post. The NYTimes also has had 2 editorial writers
have to retract numerous statements of error.

Brookes and Kristol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flor de jasmim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:34 AM
Response to Original message
3. If they can't find appropriate people to write the op-eds, perhaps they could
have someone review it BEFORE publication? Is that too much to ask?! Particularly when it is a controversial subject about a presidential candidate in the midst of a political campaign. Is that really too much to ask??

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
4. Score one for the truth!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
5. Kick and recommended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
futureliveshere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:40 AM
Response to Original message
6. Great catch!! Better late than never I say!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-02-08 07:42 AM
Response to Original message
7. Recommended
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 05:03 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC