Sunday, March 6, 2011

Truth and the New York Times

The New York Times has absolutely no standards. Even the truth is not a prerequisite for their news reporting. The latest example of non-facts in the New York Times is today's article by Peter Lattman. In an article in today's Business section on the prosecution of the Rajaratnam insider trading case, he refers to "...when Rudolph Giuliani, the United States attorney, prosecuted Wall Street executives for insider trading crimes, including Ivan F. Boesky and Michael R. Milken....."

Boesky, indeed, pled guilty to insider trading, but Milken? Why is Milken mentioned in this article? Not only was Milken not convicted of insider trading, he was never charged by Giuliani or anyone else. Indeed no one ever alleged that Milken engaged in insider trading -- never, not once. Milken plead guilty to "parking" securities, a victim-less crime that no one else in history has ever been charged with, much less convicted. The government never alleged that Milken was an inside trader. So, why the slander by the New York Times or is it just a habit with them?

When will truth become a standard for news reporting by the New York Times? How does the New York Times justify reporting outright falsehoods as in today's article and claim to be a news organization?