At least he appears top retain some capacity for embarrasment, and the FAIR article has clearly hit a nerve. It's a relief. We can now look forward to the standard NYT "US convincigly denies everything" wrap up article.
-- Mr Rosenthal,
I noticed that your newspaper has systematically supressed all information relating to the expose published in all major European newspapers providing evidence that the Chinese Embassy bombing was deliberate. I ask you to abandon this remarkable exercise in self-censorship. For this I appeal not only to journalistic ethics, but also to your self-interest. Censorship, manipulation and distortion may work when the citizenry has to choose between buying your newspaper or none at all. In a world where thousands of sources of information are a mouse click away, such tactics will forfeit credibility and (perhaps more to the point) lead to financial loss in the not too long term.
Sincerely, -----------------
This is simply not true. I do not know on what information you base this very serious and unfair charge, but it is not true. We are not systematically suppressing anything. We are investigating these new charges about the embassy bombing and we will print an article when we have the facts.
Thanks for taking the time to write. Andrew Rosenthal Foreign Editor The New York Times
--------------------- Thanks for your response. The major Western newspapers I follow did not report on the expose's truthfulness or accuracy, which, as you point out, requires time and effort; they merely reported its existence. The New York Times has not, ten days after the event. The only explanations I can think of are 1) you do not consider the matter of interest to your readers; 2) you do not consider major European newspapers reliable sources; 3) you are deliberately supressing information. Neither of the first two explanations are very convincing.
Supression of information is indeed a serious accusation. I do not make it lightly. I am enclosing a detailed report from FAIR laying out what appears to be a deliberate attempt to to supress information on the part of your paper and other US sources. It would be an impressive demonstration of journalistic integrity if your paper gave some exposure to FAIR's criticism and rebutted these serious charges.
Sincerely,
Enrique Diaz-Alvarez
------------------------ No, there is a fourth, and accurate reason. It takes one helluva lot more than a week to unearth this sort of information. If I had a reporter who came to me and said, "I just spent two days reporting and I found out the United States bombed an embassy deliberately, let's go with a story," I would have him reassigned. To another newspaper.
Thanks again for writing.
Andrew Rosenthal