NYT public editor on skepticism over NYT's past US war coverage




If people try to claim that a single decade is a long, long time ago, what does that say about our attention span, and our understanding of history?

That was one president ago. I'm not buying it.


OK, I'll bite anyway. "...but that was in another country, and besides, the wench is dead."


Remember - we look forward, not back!


I honestly don't see how this situation is very much like Iraq. The administration may not be as far to the left as some of us would like, but they're not stupid. They cannot possibly benefit from going to war in Syria, and neither can the U.S. in general, and I'd be very surprised if they held any illusions to the contrary. This wasn't true in the run-up to Iraq; the warning signs were a lot easier to ignore and there was much stronger temptation to do so.


As a German, I'm all for it. 70 years should be long enough to put out country's past behavior firmly into historic ground, like settling in America or the Roman conquest of Middle Europe.

So I expect no more nasty articles about this in the NYT. At best some delightfully racy adventures movies.


May I suggest

? wink


I was thinking more like “Lara Jones beating up Nazis while rescuing her German lover who is the rightful prince of Prussia” or something like that…


i came here to say pretty much the same thing. If 10 years ago is so long, we sure still see alot of references to 'this guy is the next hitler, that guy is the next hitler,' etc...


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.