By Robert S. Siegel
The “Torture Memos” revealed the interrogation practices that were allowed under the Bush administration, along with a clue as to why the New York Times is in financial trouble.
Tuesday, Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote an excellent piece setting the “Torture memos” into the context of the post 9-11 U.S. Friedman does not excuse nor defend the Bush administration. He does support President Obama’s decision not to prosecute.
Times columnist Maureen Dowd, on the other hand, wrote a fabrication piece, a weak satire in which Dick Cheney, in testimony to Congress, is lost in the world of Fox’s hit show 24. Cheney believes Jack Bauer is real.
The two columns caused me to ask; with the newspaper industry struggling to survive, (see Dowd, Slouching Towards Oblivion) was Dowd’s space in what is arguably the most important newspaper in the United States, possibly the world, well used? Did she add value to the debate on torture? Why didn’t New York Times editors publish a counter point to the Friedman piece, filled with facts and ideas instead of Dowd’s attempt at value? Is the Times giving up on hard core journalism to generate readership? Is sacrificing quality the best way to improve a newspaper’s bottom line?
The newspaper industry is in trouble; no one is going to debate that. However, the impacts caused by moving toward entertainment instead of providing a vigilant watch over our government are worth debating. A well informed electorate strengthens the Constitution.
I count on the New York Times to help maintain my vigilance. Unfortunately, the Times continues to shake that confidence.
{ 1 trackback }