Sunday, September 14, 2008

"What happens when the bluff no longer works?"

Dexter Filkins, writing for the New York Times:

"Pakistan’s double game has rested on two premises: that the country’s leaders could keep the militants under control and that they could keep the United States sufficiently placated to keep the money and weapons flowing. But what happens when the game spins out of control? What happens when the militants you have been encouraging grow too strong and set their sights on Pakistan itself? What happens when the bluff no longer works?"


The best reporting by the New York Times in a long, long time.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

What you mean by best is: reporting your world point of view agrees with. Don't cry because someone disagrees with you.

VK

Nick Brunetti-Lihach said...

Your comment does not make sense as it is worded, but I think I know what you are getting at.

The NYT has often reported based on very skewed coverage. For example, declaring the surge a failure barely two months after the full contingent of surge troops had been on the ground. Article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/world/middleeast/09surge.html?ei=5088&en=5d732c4254cadf37&ex=1346990400&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

Note the reporters Damien Cave and Stephen Farrell.

Yet the day before, Michael Gordon wrote of progress: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/08/world/middleeast/08military.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Both instances illustrate the Times' varyied reporting on issues. However, what is more concerning is the preponderance of their reporting, their bogus reporting, and their partisan editorials.

Here the Times got duped by a man claiming to have been an Abu Ghraib prisoner: http://nonpartypolitics.blogspot.com/2007/08/new-york-times-duped-by-abu-ghraib.html

There are a number of other accounts: Publishing the name of a CIA interrogator, and even in such instances as publishing front page news when a number of US firms get oil contracts, only to bury similar news days later that reveals that in fact a number of foreign firms are actually getting a slice of the pie.

The Times bias is often subtle, but not always, and it is largely editorial. It's sometimes difficult to describe, because you have to compare it with numerous other news sources to realize what you are actually missing.

That is why many people turn to blogs, because they A) Report the under-reported, and B) Call out the media when necessary.