Media Notes Archive   |   Live Q&As   |   RSS Feeds RSS   |  E-mail Kurtz  |  Style Section
Page 2 of 5   <       >

The Judy Chronicles

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

"And the answer? She can't remember."

Floyd Abrams told me yesterday that the other source may have just mentioned Plame, or Flame, in passing, and that Miller's only substantive source on the subject was Scooter Libby.

Jay Rosen :

"This, I think, is what will finally sever Judy Miller from the Times: Ms. Miller generally would not discuss . . . Not forgivable in the newsroom's moral code. Your colleagues are trying to finally tell the truth and get it right -- and you won't help?"

Boston Phoenix's Mark Jurkowitz :

"There's nothing in the Times revelations to argue that Judy Miller deserved to be locked up behind bars for refusing to testify about a confidential source. But there was plenty to suggest that the Times has paid a major price for again failing in its oversight of a strong-willed reporter who had generated internal skepticism about work habits and work product. And that sounds all too familiar."

Greg Mitchell takes no prisoners in his Editor & Publisher column:

"As the newspaper's devastating account of her Plame games -- and her own first-person sidebar -- make clear, she should be promptly dismissed for crimes against journalism, and her own newspaper. And Bill Keller, executive editor, who let her get away with it, owes readers, at the minimum, an apology instead of merely hailing his paper's long-delayed analysis and saying that readers can make of it what they will.

"Let's put aside for the moment Miller exhibiting the same selective memory favored by her former friends and sources in the White House, in claiming that for the life of her she cannot recall how the name of 'Valerie Flame' got into the reporter's notebook she took to her interview with Libby; how she learned about the CIA operative from other sources (whom she can't name or even recall when it happened."

Andrew Sullivan reaches back one administration for an analogy:

"Miller is pulling a Clinton when she says she cannot recall who gave her the name 'Valerie Flame.' So she is either protecting Libby or someone else entirely or her own reporting. What is she hiding and why?. . . .

"Why did her editors not insist on her turning over the notes? Are they not NYT property? Or is she somehow in a 'star reporter zone' outside of normal editorial control?"


<       2              >


© 2005 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive