Shame on the Times & a Stain on Journalism

Faithful readers will know that I am a proud liberal and am unlikely to vote for Sen. John McCain under any circumstances that I can foresee. However, the hints and attacks by the New York Times are beyond troubling.

There is certainly a scandal, but I do not know if John McCain is involved. What is clear is that there is a scandal in journalism. When the New York Times runs a story like the one on McCain, they better have more than they printed.

On the surface it seems that the issue is McCain being reckless in his confidence in his moral compass. However, when the Times puts the sexual innuendoes in the third paragraph, that becomes the story. And what is their standard for raising the possibility that he had an “improper relationship” with a lobbyist? Some of his staffers were concerned and thought that it might have become a romantic relationship. So concern begets speculation that begets a not so thinly veiled allegation? This is outrageous.

Given this standard, or rather lack of a standard, should a paper be able to print anything about which they might have an idea, inkling or suspicion? Can they protect themselves by saying, “Friends of Dobrer’s are worried that he might be (Fill in the blank)_____. Pick one or more: Sick, Perverted, Fascist, Communist.”

If it is true that some friends of mine are worried, talking or speculating, is that good enough for the “paper of record” to go with? It could be true that there is speculation but that doesn’t imply a fact.

I have no idea if McCain did anything wrong. I am very clear that the New York Times did something very wrong. If they have more, show it. If they don’t, then be ashamed, very ashamed! Meanwhile journalists the world over are speculating if the New York Times reporters and editors have lost their moral compass and their minds.