The worst journalist covering the case was the New York Times’ Duff Wilson. While reporters from the Herald-Sun were more biased, few people outside the Triangle have ever heard of the H-S. The Times, on the other hand, is trusted by many as “all the news that’s fit to print.”
In a major August article, Wilson asserted that he had personally reviewed more than 1800 pages of Mike Nifong’s discovery file—or all the material compiled in the case between March and late July. The contrast between how he characterized this evidence, in a radio interview for today’s Times, and how he characterized it on August 25 is striking.
August 25: By disclosing pieces of evidence favorable to the defendants, the defense has created an image of a case heading for the rocks. But an examination of the entire 1,850 pages of evidence gathered by the prosecution in the four months after the accusation yields a more ambiguous picture. It shows that while there are big weaknesses in Mr. Nifong's case, there is also a body of evidence to support his decision to take the matter to a jury.
Today: [The case] amounted to, really, Mr. Nifong believing that if somebody said she was raped, and if he believed her, he was supposed to take that to a jury, despite overwhelming lack of other evidence.
Those two statements cannot be reconciled. If there currently is an “overwhelming lack of other evidence,” exactly what was the “body of evidence to support [Nifong’s] decision to take the matter to a jury” about which
44 comments:
Duff Wilson needs to be on a national news show to account for his two different versions.
The New York Times needs to do something BIG to make up for the damage to the Duke Three because they were supposedly a credible paper which readers around the world could turn to for TRUTH.
The Duff Wilsons of this world will continue to lie; the NYTs of this world will continue to publish agenda-ridden propaganda. You can point out their lies all you want and they won't change. The only solution is for thinking people to stop buying the defective products masquerading as newspapers. And please, don't give me the usual excuse "oh, I only buy it for the crossword puzzle, or the entertainment section, or the weather..." Supporting the lying swine allows them to continue with their lies PERIOD
I would expect a massive wave airbrushing of history.
Thanks for documenting every
(mis)step of the prevaricators.
SAVANT
Maybe Duff Wilson can review KC's book for the NYT...I think he'll learn something from it.
Check out Duff's quote:
"Mr. Nifong just as vehemently denied the accusations of political manipulation. But in bringing charges, Mr. Nifong discounted evidence of innocence — including alibi evidence from time-stamped photographs and cellphone records — and relied almost entirely on the woman’s photo identification of the three suspects and on a report by the sexual assault nurse who examined the woman."
Hold on, Duff, what happened to the ambiguous evidence?
"Body of evidence!"
What body?
Who died?
Yup:
reminiscent of the rumors of
the death of Samuel Clemmons
(Mark Twain:)
"The report of my death was
an exaggeration."
Twain also said:
"It ain't what you don't know
that gets you into trouble.
It's what you know for sure
that just ain't so."
NoFang should read Twain the
lines a little more.
Mac
Check out the Back Story on the left hand side of the story, which has a six minute interview with Wilson. He now seems sorry for the three young men and doesn't hesitate to criticize Nifong, which means that he has convenientely forgotten his earlier article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/us/12duke.html?hp
I looked out my window yesterday to see Duff Wilson rushing about, eyes to the ground. He was carrying sheaves of the 8/25/06 NYT. I could hear him muttering, "memory hole, memory hole, it's gotta be around here somewhere!"
Last night, Duff's editors joined the hunt. In fact, I see them out there now.
Still looking.
I am even troubled by Duff's statement that Nifong relied on the sexual assault nurse's report...that implies that the SANE nurse found evidence of a rape. It was my understanding that the SANE report actually was NOT worded in a way to suggest there was evidence of a violent rape. Nifong may have said he was relying on this report (which wasn't even available when he said he was relying on it) but Duff should be pointing out that, just as the ID procedure was faulty, Nifong's claim that the SANE report provided evidence of a rape was incorrect.
All the news that fits, we print.
Good news for the accuser - if Cooper is prepared to accept that she is delusional, perjury charge is unlikely. Although it's very politically convenient not too charge her, Cooper deserves the benefit of the doubt.
In the end, the Times did not want to be caught on the losing side. What a disgrace.
In yesterday's brief NYT article before the press conference, Wilson twice mentioned how the accuser changed her story in December in response to additional DNA evidence. He made a big deal out of it, said she changed a "key" part of her story, and acted as if this development alone was enough to unravel the prosecution's case.
It looked like this was goung to be their official way out of the August article, since it happened afterwards. Of course this is ridiculous, but they were desperate.
After the AG press conference, there can no longer even be a pretense that there was ever a legitimate case as described in the August article, or a "a body of evidence to support his decision to take the matter to a jury" as the Times put it.
So now, it looks like they've just decided to pretend the August piece never happened.
It reminds you of when they killed off Bobby Ewing on Dallas. Then when they realized they made a mistake and wanted to bring him back, they had to figure out how to explain entire season with him being dead.
Maybe the Times can say that their disgraceful August piece was just Pam Ewing's dream.
For those interested in the MSM coverage of the events of yesterday, check out The Cincinnati Enquirer. I jest, there is not so much as a mention. I suppose if the MSM doesn’t like the outcome of a story they simply choose not to put it their rag.
By trying to backtrack now and present a 180 degree version of what he wrote last year, the NYT's Duff Wilson is channelling the government of the Soviet Union that consistently airbrushed "inconvenient" people out of photos once they no longer served a "useful" purpose. Of course, the NYT has been in league with the Commmies since at least the 30's when Walter Duranty wrote untruths about the famine in the Ukraine that killed millions and was rewarded for his lies by receiving a Pulitzer.
Anon @ 7:56 is spot on. It is irritating to hear someone try to justify purchasing a paper for some specific piece of it as if the money they spend is funneled directly to the guy who creates the crossword or writes the sports. Anyone who buys a newspaper these days is contributing to a form of cancer. There are a lot less harmful (and oftentimes less expensive) ways to feed your "news jones."
So here you have further confirmation that he's a hack. No surprise.
What's worse is that there are many, many reporters just like him, all aided and abetted by editors and publishers whose behavior is governed more by the need to adhere to the politically correct consensus rather than any ethic of objectivity.
Still glad I cancelled my subscription, Not missing the "work" of Duff Wilson and associates.
I'm glad I cancelled my subscription also. I miss my morning walk to get the paper but I don't miss the paper at all.
Very early in the hoax, the ombudsman for the NYT wrote an article saying even if the charges proved to be false, the case should be examined for issues of race, class, etc. I wanted to vomit when I read that article. But it opened my eyes to the fact that the NYT doesn't care about truth but has descended to being a shill for mendacious politicos. Thanks J. Miller and D. Wilson.MDEsq.
There is no other way to put it....
Wilson is a hypocrite.
He deserves no respect as a writer until he addresses the issue head on and explains himself.
The guy is a writer. If he doesn't step up to the plate and explain why he wrote what he wrote he's not worthy of anyone's respect.
So, Mr. Wilson....let's have it, we're waiting.
KC: I assume you contacted Wilson to point out this contradiction and asked for his comments. Please confirm that he has been asked about this and offered the opportunity to explain himself.
As a student of journalism, I for one would love to hear what he has to say. I love the fact that you are calling him (and others) to answer for their statements and actions.
Thanks for all you've done and continue to do.
Mike Lee
"All the news that fits (our leftist, PC agenda), we print."
With apologies to wright, who is so right.
"In the end, the Times did not want to be caught on the losing side."
You're right, Bill. But -- oops -- too late! They've already been caught. As with Nifong, we know what they did and why they did it. And we're not about to forget it.
I still can't believe that before Duke Hoax reporting even smart people (KC??) actually believed that New York al-Times was a quality newspaper. It has always been a far-left propaganda outlet.
Imus firing is another sad episode. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are all over TV demanding FCC actions. Democratic party is pushing fair and equality regulations so for example, this blog would have to give 50% of space to pro-Nifong postings. This law would practically end talk radio, blogs and Fox News. New York al-Times and CBS "News" are of course excluded, after all they are honest newspapers who report only the facts, not opinions.
The battle has been won, but the war is practically lost. Just see Gang88 gaining more power, and New York Times and Al Sharpton getting away with this.
In 2009, congressman (or senator) Mike Nifong is probably chairing FCC hearings.
I have been a party to a number of disputes and debates both on-line and in real life regarding "hard" subjects like technology and "soft" subjects like sociological theory.
The great constant has been that people hardly ever say, 'You are right, I have been wrong, thank you for enlightening me." The best you can hope for is that the other side starts to pretend that the better ideas were actually the way they thought all along. It is not pretty but that seems to be the nature of the species of which we are members.
It would be nice of course to trap Duff Wilson in a pit dug by his on-the-record inconsistencies. Nice, but hard to pull off.
In other words,seeing the other side act as if they always agreed with you is about as good as it gets, in real life.
Besides, the outcome of this affair has been simply astounding; one for the ages.
I stayed home from the office yesterday so that I would be sure of seeing it all in real time. I am glad I did because my reaction when Cooper said the word, "Innocent" would have wrecked my reputation as a quiet, even tempered professional.
Yesterday was a very good day. The glass is not half empty, it is over-flowingly, abundantly full.
Not only are the newspapers wrong before, the media is still wrong. Andrew Cohen wrote--"we still will never know what happened"--even though fifty witnesses say nothing happened, Jeffrey Toobin said on the air that the delay was the defendants doing, as Nifong wanted to go to trial and defendants resisted (exactly the opposite) and so on. And these fools are enabling the other fools, such as the biology professor who said that we can't know what happened because we did not have a trial, and so froth and so on.
Duff makes me see red - theonly answer is to boycott the NYT, Duff and Selena.
I can testify to the impact such articles can have on people.
Some Durham area friends gather weekly, and lacrosse rarely comes up. On August 25 one of them (Duke PhD '83) said "so, they are guilty"? Startled, I asked her to explain, and she cited the NYT article.
I could easy rebut the article (despite not having read it :-), but for many other people who only hear of the case casually, perhaps second-hand, the LAX 3 will be forever guilty as charged.
The scary thing is not that they have a viewpoint, but that they are so supremely stupid. The articles, such as Dufus Wilson's article, was just absurd. I mean, to not even ask why the notes are prepared months later is moronic. And most of the talking heads don't even have the remotest understanding of what actually happened. Last night, Judge Napolitano referred to Cooper as Nifong's boss and asked why he did not rein him in, confirming that he has failed, after a full year, to even have the most basic understanding of the North Carolina system or why Cooper proposed further controls.
Reading the lead story in the NYT today, if you didn't know better, you would think KC wrote it. What a bunch of hypocrites!!!!!!!!
I am embarrassed to say, I once found the Times my must read. The death of a once great newspaper, the result of a biased political agenda and unbelievable arrogance.
I am embarrassed to say, I once found the Times my must read. The death of a once great newspaper, the result of a biased political agenda and unbelievable arrogance.
I have to confess something..When I entered this country in 2001, I also thought New York Times is a quality newspaper and I read it every Sunday. Once I started to follow things more closely and I realized the bias, outright forgeries and propaganda, I moved on. This was around early 2003.
Jamil @ 2:07 PM
Moving on from the NYT ... feels good, doesn't it?
Whenever I see someone reading the NYT, my first impulse is to feel pity. Here they are spending valuable discretionary time reading the NYT, believing they are educating themselves on some issue or another, but when they've finished they are actually just as likely to be more ignorant than before they started.
Newspapers should come with a warning label:
CAUTION --- Reading this product may be hazardous to your mental health. The Surgeon General, however, has determined there are no deleterious effects from using this product as a bird cage liner or fishwrap.
I read Duff's NY times piece today. They never quote the AG saying innocent. A historic statement by a AG and the Times leaves it out.
Essentially, our culture has devolved into the serial practice of partisanship without regard for the individual or the pursuit of the truth. We're not looking to find the truth, we’re looking to create truth and that is a pivotal distinction. As such, each issue becomes the flagship for opposing interest groups and the epicenter for partisan politics. Those actually involved in this and other incidents (and they are often victims) become nothing more than pawns in an elaborate game of chess...and they are frequently further victimized.
These situations shouldn't be about whether liberals or conservatives, this race or that race, hip hop or honky-tonk, one group or another, are more offensive and therefore more responsible for all that is wrong with America.
I'm not a religious person...but I often find kinship with the imagery surrounding the portrayal of one called Jesus and his teachings of understanding and forgiveness. For all the banter I hear about the Bible and Christian values, it certainly seems to me that we are fast abandoning what many view as the sacred "tablets" in favor of the sacrosanct tabloids. If I'm right, all I can say is heaven help us.
Read more about the dynamics that lead a situation to become larger than the sum of its parts...here:
www.thoughttheater.com
So what exactly was Mr. Wilson doing during the period the Times paid him to review 1800+ pages of evidence in NC? I've no idea, but years ago I settled on the cnclusion that reporters as a class are exceedingly lazy. That's why they take the liberal/PC line on most everyhing; it takes little critical thinking or digging through actual facts so they all give the same slant on stories about Duke, UN oil for food, Iraq, immigration, global warming, you name it. Herd mentality requires little individual thinking. I doubt Mr. Wilson is very different than most of his journalist companions in that regard. That leaves plenty of room for consciencious journalists to shine, so long as they find a place where the editors alow them to.
I propose a new verb: *To Duff*...
As in "Man, you really Duffed up that one" or "Quit Duffing around, you dumb Duff"
Adjective and noun options are also available:
"What a total lack of Duffing care"
or
"That is such a load of Duff"
Duff Wilson obviously was beaten up by a little girl when he was in grade school. You can try to hide this most damning form of cowardice - that which foments during childhood - but it always reveals itself in adulthood, especially when given the opportunity to vicariously experience revenge. Somebody get this creep to a psychiatrist!
How the hell would Duff Wilson be able to make that statement about the contents of a prosecutor's discovery file? Duff Wilson is not a lawyer. It would take a skilled litigator to come to the conclusion that Duff came to, and from what I can tell, there was no skilled litigator standing over his shoulder.
Now THIS is what an apology should look like! (And a wonderful shot at Jesse Jackson to boot). (Jemele Hill from ESPN)
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=hill/070412&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos1
Rev. Al: "Have you thought about what would be the appropriate punishment for your behavior?" Oh wait - that's what he said to Don Imus.
Anthony says: The Times new motto"All the news that's Shit to print"
NYTimes motto:
"Spin the news to fit our views"
How about the NYTimes's sportswriter, Selena Roberts? She virtually said that the evidence didn't matter, that the players were part of a racist, sexist, macho jock system of which black women are the victims. The actual facts don't matter; it's the "narrative" that counts.
I don't buy the Times any more, but if you really must have the entertainment (wine, real estate, financial, sports, book review, etc.) section or the crossword, just give the front section back to your news agent after paying for the paper. He'll return it to the Times for full credit.
This tip on ringing the Times' doorbell and running was suggested by the fertile and mischevious Mark Simone.
Orwell's inspiration for The Ministry of Truth was not, as I long assumed, TASS, but the BBC - his era's equivalent of today's NYTimes - thoroughly mendacious, relentlessly dishonest, and not infrequently incompetent.
" . . . and I saw newspapers... retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that had never happened.
I saw, in fact, history being written not in terms of what happened but of what ought to have happened according to various 'party lines'... This kind of thing is frightening to me, because it often gives me the feeling that the very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world. "
- Orwell
Post a Comment