Thursday, February 21, 2008

NY TIMES USES ANONYMOUS SOURCES TO SMEAR MCCAIN

Jim Taricani

The NY Times ought to be ashamed of itself. It published a front page article about Senator John McCain’s relationship with a female lobbyist, and asserted, by quoting anonymous sources, that McCain and the lobbyist may have been romantically involved.
Following the fiasco with former Times reporter Judy Miller and her biased reporing on the weapons of mass destruction supposedly being hidden by Saddam Hussein, the Times adopted a new policy on the use of anonymous sources. The paper said it would reduce the use of these sources, and when anonymous sources were used, there would be a parenthetical explanation about why the source couldn’t be quoted.
But the Times article on McCain simply says two campaign aides from the senator’s first presidential campaign in 2000 said they were “ concerned “ that the senator’s relationship with a powerful lobbyist might be romantic.
To make this assertion witihout demanding that the sources go on the record is shoddy, yellow journalism.
There is a time and place where the use of anonymous sources is necessary and warranted. But raising this type of scandalous allegation without attribution is dead wrong.
The rest of the Times story is fine. It raises serious questions about McCain’s relationship with this lobbyist that sometimes seems to contradict the senator’s self-procalimed reformer image.
But to raise the possiblity that McCain had an illicit romantic relationship based on two anonymous sources is shameful.
The lobbyist has denied that McCain did any favors for her, and the senator himself is holding a news conference this morning ( Thursday, February 21) to address the allegations in the story.
I atteneded a seminar with Bill Keller, the Executive Editor of the Times last summer, and he told the people there that he was determined to clean up the Times’ act, and be much more careful with the use of anonymous sources.
He flunked on this one.