> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of Charles Jannuzi
> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 10:14 PM
> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> Subject: RE: Anthrax mysteries
>
<<SNIP>>
> Second, the 'anonymous' editorial (a common practice at many
> newspapers Chip) is largely based on an article in the Wall Street
> Journal--not an editorial mind you. I found it to be a good summary of the
> Epstein article.
<<SNIP>>
Since I actually have articles published in newspapers, I know the differences among an unsigned editorial, an op-ed, and a column.
The column in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review is written anonymously by a so-called Washington insider. It appears regularly. It is neither an unsigned editorial nor an op-ed. The description of the column from the web page is as follows:
" "Dateline D.C." is written by a Washington, D.C.-based British journalist and political observer. "
I thought the Epstein article was interesting. It would have been much more appropriate to cite the original article rather than an elaboration of it in an anonymous column in a right-wing newspaper known for its conspiracism. The Epstein artlce was published in December, and said the FBI had been premature in dismissing the possibility that foreign actors are involved in the sending of the real anthrax letters.
I agree. In fact I posted the same sentiments on the PRA web page before the Epstein article appeared, although he certainly has much more detail.
See: http://www.publiceye.org/frontpage/911/who_anthrax.html
I also made similar comments on NPR's All Things Considered in mid November.
I will continue to oppose conspiracism becasue it undercuts serious left-wing analysis, and feeds the recruitment of right-wing populist groups.
-Chip Berlet