The New York Times

I think the New York Times is a great paper. While I don't always fancy its editorials (Iraq war, anyone?), and of late it has made some absolutely terrible management decisions, it is easily the best written, most eclectic, most interesting newspaper on the planet. Even when covering the most mundane topics, the writing is fluid and thoughtful.

That said, this Judy Miller fiasco continues to imperil the paper's future as a credible news source -- as well as impact the First Amendment and journalists' use of anonymous sources. Miller's WMD stories, many based largely (exclusively?) on anonymous government sources who used her to push the fictional/flawed case for war, were embarrassing. And there will be more about that in the days to come, no doubt, as the Fitzgerald investigation concludes.

Today, in an example of sloppiness around the Wilson/Miller/Iraq/Fitzgerald story, an Elisabeth Bumiller story makes this inaccurate claim which seems to be drawn directly from the GOP talking points written about in another story today (and which I discussed yesterday after Sen. Hutchison fired up the GOP's anti-scandal spin machine. From Bumiller's "White House Letter":

Lawyers involved in the case say that the prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, is focusing on whether Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby sought to conceal their actions and mislead prosecutors in the C.I.A. leak case. Among the charges he is considering, they say, are perjury and obstruction of justice - both peripheral to the issue Mr. Fitzgerald was appointed to investigate, which is whether anyone in the administration revealed the identity of a covert intelligence officer, a potential crime.

That is simply false. Lying or obstructing justice is a crime unto itself, as well as a crime directly related to the core investigation. How can lying to hide the truth about the CIA leak be "peripheral" to the investigation? That's preposterous. And it's a sign of bad editing for it to have slipped through.

I'm pulling for the Times to get its act together. As today's piece on gold mining makes clear, it simply does reporting and writing that is top notch, and top-notch reporting is terribly important in our troubled democracy. Those who seek to undermine the Times will do so even without evidence of errors and misjudgements. That's why errors and misjudgements must be dealt with openly and quickly.

That the paper didn't fire Judy Miller months (years?) ago was a terrific blunder.