They apparently want credit for being "the first major publication to pick apart the prosecution’s case".
That claim is laughable to anyone who read what the N&O was printing in the summer of 2006.
In this post from January, i wrote:
But the truth is, they ran alot of stories on the Duke lacrosse travesty, however their coverage has not been fair, accurate, comprehensive, or exhaustive. They began with vicious attacks on the lacrosse team , a sanitized interview with the dancer/escort, and a docile acceptance of Nifong's statements. Since then they have made grudging attempts to cover the new developments fairly (Joseph Neff has done stand-out work) but they have also made many missteps. Most importantly, their coverage has not been comprehensive because they have never "exhaustively" examined their coverage nor owned up to their mistakes.
I think that is still a fair assessment.
If you read through these posts, you can see that the N&O was a Nifong-enabler long after they claim that they became an important critic.
Their culpability continues to this day. They know that the DPD lied in the early days of the case. Yet, they are unwilling to address those lies for the record. The reason is simple: those liars were important sources for the N&O.
No comments:
Post a Comment