[Peace-discuss] On Iran IAEA Reporting Complaints, NYT Public Editor Rules for the Plaintiffs

[Robert Naiman]

Responding to complaints over a New York Times report that purported
to cite "a recent assessment by the International Atomic Energy Agency
that Iran's nuclear program has a military objective," New York Times
Public Editor Arthur Brisbane has written that the complaints were
just, and that the New York Times should correct the story.

Brisbane wrote: "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 doesn't 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."

In other words: it's important to get this right, because getting it
wrong unjustly promotes the cause of war.

As of this writing -- eight hours after the Public Editor's post, six
days after the original article appeared, and people first complained
about it -- there is still no correction.

In other contexts -- not linked to the fervent desire of some people
for military confrontation with Iran -- the Times purports to be quite
punctilious about corrections, as when it corrected a misidentified
character from an animated children's TV show.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/on-iran-iaea-reporting-co_b_1197905.html

--
Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org