I've been feeling, for the last several years -- indeed, since the Clinton administration -- that the press has been unusually lax in its chasing down of real stories, and has allowed politicians to tell it what the truth is.
Yes, I do know that the press is actually a number of individual people, but in this regard, they have been acting pretty much the same. So I was heartened to read that the New York Times is admitting that they were falling down on the job:
In an unusual note from the editors, "The Times and Iraq," the newspaper said it found a number of instances before the March 2003 U.S. and British invasion of Iraq and early in the occupation, of "coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been."
The note said editors "should have been challenging reporters and pressing for more skepticism."
Now let's see if this admission leads to any real change in policy, at the Times or other newspapers or reporting agencies.
