New York Times Responds on Iran Alarmism

Horhey · Sep 16, 2012

At least the editors do often respond to FAIR Action Alerts:

FAIR: NYT Responds on Iran Alarmism

Public Editor: 'I think the readers are correct on this'

1/10/12

New York Times public editor Arthur Brisbane has responded to concerns raised in a FAIR action alert last week (1/6/12), agreeing that the paper wrongly suggested that the International Atomic Energy Agency has concluded that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon.

In a post at his Times blog (1/10/12), Brisbane agrees that the paper was incorrect in referring to "a recent assessment by the International Atomic Energy Agency that Iran's nuclear program has a military objective." As FAIR pointed out, the IAEA report does not make such a firm conclusion, and many critics question the evidence that Agency has collected.

Brisbane concluded:

I think the readers are correct on this. The Times hasn't corrected the story but it should because this is a case of when a shorthand phrase doesnt do justice to a nuanced set of facts. In this case, the distinction between the two is important because the Iranian program has emerged as a possible casus belli.
Click to expand...

While not mentioning FAIR, Brisbane wrote: "Some readers, mindful of the faulty intelligence and reporting about Saddam Husseins weapons program, are watching the Iran nuclear coverage very closely."

He is correct. FAIR thanks all the activists who wrote to the New York Times.
Click to expand...

Log in or Sign up

New York Times Responds on Iran Alarmism

Horhey Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

New York Times Responds on Iran Alarmism

Horhey Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches