truth

[threeplusfire]

A staff reporter for The New York Times committed frequent acts of journalistic fraud while covering significant news events in recent months, an investigation by Times journalists has found. The widespread fabrication and plagiarism represent a profound betrayal of trust and a low point in the 152-year history of the newspaper.

The article is mammoth and amazing, yet for all the detail there are pieces missing. Just what made this man go to these lengths to do what he did? Journalism is an intensive labor, but it seems as if walking this tightrope of deception would be even more difficult. What? Why? Who are you Mr. Blair and why did you do this?

The very same technology that gives us the power to spread information, to expose the truth also allows that information to be twisted and the truth concealed. I am vividly reminded of the first three issues of Transmetropolitan when Spider Jerusalem comes back down off the mountain to write again. There's a scene where he's writing and his words go live on the screens all over the city, and it's so damned eloquent and true that it stops what is happening. And even though he's beaten by the police afterwards for it, and it doesn't cause an overall change, it's something. I was standing on the LX Express, turning onto Jollyville road when I read that part, and I remember the late afternoon sun going down, the grooves of the floor, the tears sliding down my face and into the collar of my shirt.

If there was ever something I wanted to believe in more than myself, it would be the idea that truth can change the world and that people can choose to be better than they are.

Comments

[rm.livejournal.com]

That piece made me very uncomfortable. For instance they refer constantly to his personal problems that were used to justify some of the instances -- yet what these problems are are never stated -- did the Times staff even know? If the information is being kept from us, surely a sentence to that effect with its reason should be stated -- otherwise it looks (as it does) as a weird effort to make this person who got away with all this shit look as bad as possible -- not as a journalist (that much is clear), but as a human being.

I felt there was a lot of coded language in the piece, allusions to mental instalibty in the form of his being messy and disorganized that don't speak to the layers of deception or the utter shoddiness of the New York Times in paying attention to any of it.

I mean, the fellow didn't go to particular pains to hide what he was doing (note the receipts and reimbursements section).

[tsarina.livejournal.com]

There is a lot missing there. It's driving me crazy, trying to figure out what they could be, and how all this came about.

It seems just so weird and sad to me.

[lawnrrd]

I want to reread this more closely, because I was too disturbed to pay attention the first time through. But it shows a massive breakdown in oversight at the Times.

My wife is a professional journalist and active in her journalism school's alumni association. There are thus many journalists in our circle, including some who write for the Times. I'm very interested to see what they're going to have to say about this guy. For her part, my wife's first comment was, "Where did this guy go to school?"

Re:

[tsarina.livejournal.com]

It is quite mad, when you sit back and think about how long this went on and the lengths this man went to in his fabrication. Boggles the mind, truly.

[delchi.livejournal.com]

HAve you ever read " bright lights, big city " ? In that story the lead chr is a facts validator for " Gotham Magazine " , and it reveals a bit of what it's like behind the scenes. It ahs been hinted over the years that this section of the story is basted on J.M.'s experinece starting out.

Re:

[tsarina.livejournal.com]

The title is familiar but I haven't read that actually.