From CNN:
New York (CNN Business)The New York Times was reeling on Monday after its Opinion section fumbled a high-profile story about an allegation of sexual misconduct against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, drawing widespread criticism and condemnation of the newspaper.
It was the latest in a series of high-profile blunders that has caused embarrassment to James Bennet since he was appointed in 2016 as the editor overseeing The Times’ Opinion section.Bennet’s tenure has been marked with several mishaps that have generated controversy, drawn criticism, and spurred at least one lawsuit.[…]
But while the Opinion section has unquestionably produced strong work in the years since Bennet took over, it has also been culpable for some of the biggest journalistic black eyes at The Times during that period.The latter happened again over the weekend when The Times’ Sunday Review, which falls under Opinion, published an essay based on a forthcoming book written by two Times reporters, detailing a previously unreported allegation of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh, which he denied.The allegation in the book hinged on the recollection of a Yale classmate who The Times reported contacted the FBI and lawmakers during Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing. The Yale classmate, who is now a prominent lawyer, has declined to comment publicly, according to The Times.But the book, “The Education of Brett Kavanaugh,” included a key detail that the essay published by the Times was lacking: The woman at the center of it, who’d been a student at the time of the incident, declined to be interviewed. Moreover, her friends said she did not recall the incident.
This of course raises the suspicion that the omission was deliberate. If so, the Times had to know that their “error” would be discovered in short order. What then could be the motivation behind something so blatant? The Times’ hatred for the president and all things conservative is well known. One would think, however, that their commitment to journalistic integrity (don’t gag) and their ethical standing among their peers (wince) would prevent such things from occurring. If, however, something nefarious is afoot, the Times knows that many, many people don’t catch retractions and corrections. Millions of people, no doubt, believe stories like this and will repeat them to others without having a clue that they’re grossly inaccurate or have been debunked. So, if their hatred for Kavanaugh outweighs their integrity, they can be satisfied that damage has been inflicted at the cost of an apology.
On the other hand, it’s quite amusing that CNN quickly jumped to point the wagging finger at the Times when they’ve done their part to smear eggs on their own faces. By my lights, the only justification for this insanity is that CNN is overjoyed to deflect the spotlight off of the carnage they’ve made of their own reputation. Perhaps people will think that they actually have standards if they scream loudly enough at the Times. Sorry, CNN. That ship sailed a long time ago.
