Tornado Alley (PROG)

[StephanieVanbryce]

NYT Responds on Iran Alarmism

Public Editor: 'I think the readers are correct on this'

1/10/12

New York Times public editor Arthur Brisbane has responded to concerns raised in a FAIR action alert last week (1/6/12), agreeing that the paper wrongly suggested that the International Atomic Energy Agency has concluded that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon.

In a post at his Times blog (1/10/12), [ http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/10/times-errors-irans-nukes-sfs-voting/ ] Brisbane agrees that the paper was incorrect in referring to "a recent assessment by the International Atomic Energy Agency that Iran's nuclear program has a military objective." As FAIR pointed out, the IAEA report does not make such a firm conclusion, and many critics question the evidence that Agency has collected.

Brisbane concluded:

I think the readers are correct on this. The Times hasn't corrected the story but it should because this is a case of when a shorthand phrase doesn’t do justice to a nuanced set of facts. In this case, the distinction between the two is important because the Iranian program has emerged as a possible casus belli

While not mentioning FAIR, Brisbane wrote: "Some readers, mindful of the faulty intelligence and reporting about Saddam Hussein’s weapons program, are watching the Iran nuclear coverage very closely."

He is correct. FAIR thanks all the activists who wrote to the New York Times.

Referenced Article that caused the ruckus
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/world/europe/europe-moves-toward-ban-on-iran-oil.html

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4462

It's always nice to have a paper acknowledge they were OUT of LINE on issues .......rather than the 'websites' that PRINT
OUTRAGEOUS articles .....and NEVER say BOO about them again when they are found to be in ERROR! ......continuously!