Okrent did a good job with his piece. I'm sure his contract won't be renewed by the NYT, as he forced the Times' mea culpa (of sorts). Keller cannot pass on all the blame to Raines, although the latter does deserve much of it.

You haven't mentioned it as yet, but the NYT Book Review yesterday featured a review by Andrew Sullivan, who seems to be back on the good side of NYT under Keller. I am an avid reader of the Book Review and look forward to it every week. What was most surprising to me is that Andrew's review started on the front page of the Book Review, which is rather unusual, especially with respect to a book that may not be that significant. I guess Andrew was selected because of his battles with Catholicism as was a subject of the book. But front page? Was this a form of NYT "redemption" for Andrew having been fired by Raines? Perhaps this is payback to Andrew for Keller's getting the top job. Perhaps Okrent should follow up. I'm sure there's a story there. Okrent would have a field day citing all of Andrew's nasty comments about Raines and the NYT.

All "The failure was not individual, but institutional" means is that, yes, Judy Miller should be fired, but she's not the only one.

Patrick Tyler probably also needs to go, as well as Jill Abrahamson, one of the two managing editors, who, according to Okrent, personally edited some of Miller's most egregious stories. In a way, it's a shame: Abrahamson has had a far more distinguished career than Miller, and her work with Jane Mayer on the forces that sought to win Clarence Thomas' confirmation by smearing Anita Hill was honorable journalism. But this is a much bigger deal than the fabricated view from a West Virginia front porch.

There is a basic problem with reporters: only people who have "inside sources" can be considered for major stories. Following that logic you must tolerate a major level of incompetence from people who have the important names in their rolodex.

A good reporter is one who does their job in a manner that makes "inside sources" afraid not to return their calls. A good reporter has developed sources that are truly independent from each other, not merely multiple members of the same "choir". A good reporter "outs" and broadcasts the fact that the individual lies.

Miller drank the kool-ade and then used it to write her stories.

I agree with Shag that "Dead Man Walking" Okrent won't be with New Pravda for too long. However, I a disagree with my esteemed colleague about Okrent's effectiveness.

From what I've seen of his alleged work, he's spent his time as ombudsman, creating alibis for the management, rather than representing the readers to the editorial board. Now, on West 43rd St, they may consider that what an ombudsman does, but here on Planet Earth we call that being a PR flack, or in a similar context, "Defense Attorney".

The Ole Grey Lady has sold out, my brothers. It's been obvious for some time now that they've decided to strap that mattress on their backs and take steno for the Fascist Party. I can understand it, because these people up there in what used to be the Home of Democracy are frightening. But the thugs terrorize their victims one by one. If ALL the newspaper robots suddenly got backbones, we might still have a chance to remain free. Since the majority of a newpaper's income derives from advertising, however, the Rethugs figure they've got a good armlock on the dissemination of propaganda.

As for Miller: it's been a matter of public knowledge for over 20 years that she does her best "journalistic" work in hotel rooms.

1. Timely
   
2. Strategery
   
3. Webb wins
   
4. Huh?
   
5. Bunnypants in Bagdad
   
6. Outage
   
7. Filthy Lucre Watch
   
8. Playing the numbers
   
9. My letter to Countdown
   
10. Jefferson's Nigerian Scams