Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Wednesday, January 31, 2007

New York Times Loses Its Iraq War Embeds

And rightfully so.

WASHINGTON — A photograph and videotape of a Texas soldier dying in Iraq published by the New York Times have triggered anger from his relatives and Army colleagues and revived a long-standing debate about which images of war are proper to show.

The journalists involved, Times reporter Damien Cave and Getty Images photographer Robert Nickelsberg, working for the Times, had their status as so-called embedded journalists suspended Tuesday by the Army corps in Baghdad, military officials said, because they violated a signed agreement not to publish photos or video of any wounded soldiers without official consent.

The Times’ explanation is just plain lame:

New York Times foreign editor Susan Chira said Tuesday night that the newspaper initially did not contact the family of Army Staff Sgt. Hector Leija about the images because of a specific request from the Army to avoid such a direct contact.

“The Times is extremely sensitive to the loss suffered by families when loved ones are killed in Iraq,” Chira said. “We have tried to write about the inevitable loss with extreme compassion.”

Apparently being “extremely sensitive” and showing “extreme compassion” means “splash photos and video of your dead family member all over the media.”

But hey, no ethical obligation is too large to steamroll over on the Times’ way to undermining public support for the war.

She said that after the newspaper account, with a photograph of the soldier, was published Monday, a Times reporter in Baghdad made indirect efforts to tell the family of the video release later that day. The video was still available for viewing on the Times’ Web site Tuesday night, when the newspaper notified clients of its photo service that the photograph at issue was no longer available and should be eliminated from any archives.

As of the time of this post the video is still available on the Times website.

Comments

Avatar for halatbis

Maybe the New York Times can save a bunch of money by not having to pay their embeds.  They can take their cue from CNN--contact Al Jezeera (sp?) and get their photos and stories from them.  One problem with that--Al Jezeera may not be far left enough to make good copy for the NYTimes.

halatbis on January 31, 2007 at 01:51 pm
Rob
Rob
17185 comments
Send a private message

Given the way the Times’ stock has been selling they certainly need to save some money.


The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on January 31, 2007 at 02:03 pm

Rob,

The problem isn’t with the selling.  It’s that no one is buying.


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on January 31, 2007 at 02:09 pm

The New York Times - all the stuff that shouldn’t be printed (includes classified documents).  Tell me, how does this differ from most tabloids?


Being liberal is never having to admit you’re wrong

docdave on January 31, 2007 at 03:17 pm

Tell me, how does this differ from most tabloids?

Well, Tabloids typically print rumors and exaggerations, whereas what the Times prints… Oh, I guess there isn’t much difference.

electnixon on January 31, 2007 at 03:33 pm

electnixon-- Or the NYT prints disinformation (a communist propaganda deception).  The greatest one so far was Walter Duranty’s whitewashing of Stalin’s murder of Seven million Ukranians in the 1930.


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on January 31, 2007 at 04:01 pm

I especially like the “let’s move on” crap about Berger’s document theft, while the left is still carping about the runup to the war.  Maybe when they “move on” from that one…


"If the good men are silent only the wicked are heard.” - Edmund Burke

robert108 on January 31, 2007 at 07:21 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.