Address your e-mail to
the editors to [email protected]. Please include your address and daytime phone
number (for confirmation only).
NewsHour Takes Umbrage
"Today's Papers"
of April 15 alleges Jim Lehrer was not truthful Tuesday night when he explained
on the NewsHour why Stuart Taylor was dropped as a Supreme Court
reporter. The
Slate
column alleges the reason was that Taylor had
had conversations with Kenneth Starr about a job with the independent
prosecutor. That is absolutely wrong. In fact, Taylor appeared on the
NewsHour during the period when we knew he was talking to Starr.
--Lester M.
Crystal , executive producer NewsHour With Jim Lehrer
Editor's note: As we
read that column, we find no allegation that Jim Lehrer was not truthful. Any
such implication was certainly unintentional.
Defending
Dad
This e-mail is in regard to
the unfair, as well as poorly researched, article about my
father, Henry Louis Gates Jr. It is very seldom that I take notice of any
article that even mentions my father. This one caught my eye, not only because
of the ridiculous picture of him on the front, but also the numerous pages of
incompetent work.
I have
grown to know my father's faults over the years, and yes, in many cases people
are blind to them. I, for one, think they should be. Never in my life have I
seen a man so dedicated. I do not mention only one thing he is particularly
dedicated to, because I see him on a day-to-day basis, going to work and doing
a job that only he could ever do. He never ever leaves the house before
completing a daily routine that he has done every day for as long as I've known
him. Part of the routine includes bringing coffee to my mother every morning to
start her day, making sure the house is in order, kissing us all goodbye, and
then taking care of himself. Although I don't think any of our
home life is even any of your business, I had to comment on the fact that you
quoted him as saying he was a bad father and husband. If in fact he said that,
I am sorry. He is a wonderful father. My sister and I would be the only
people to ever know if that is true. Printing it in your little article
was, for lack of better words, stupid. I also know my father loves to do a
million things at once. That fact holds true wherever we go. Even on slow,
laid-back family getaways, where no reporter who is trying to get some
recognition can follow us. When he reaches the last thing on the list, it may
not be done to the best of his unsurpassable ability, but it wasn't due to any
fault of his own. He is an amazing man, it is true, but he gets tired like the
best of them do. You can understand that, can't you? You seem to have slept a
little bit while you were writing this article. And you can quote me when I say
that this article was an insult to your magazine.
-- Elizabeth Helen
Claire Gates
Interesting Conflict Over Conflict of Interest
In
Michael Kinsley's "Ethics Upside Down," he notes that there are two possible reasons
why conflict of interest is a bad thing for journalists:
1) The conflict causes
some kind of personal advantage to distort either your perception of the truth
or your willingness to honestly state what you perceive. In other words, it
amounts to a bribe. Or 2) the conflict reveals a previously hidden incentive or
tendency to misperceive or misstate the truth.
But I
think he misses an important reason: Though the conflict may not reveal a
previously hidden incentive (as in 2), it may create one. That is, the
journalist's aim before the conflict may have been to present the truth as
accurately as he could--whether additionally inserting his own opinion or
not--without any hidden incentive or tendency to misstate the truth present.
But the conflict itself might create such a tendency or incentive. I
cannot judge whether Stuart Taylor fell prey to this possibility. But he
certainly could have been instilled with a tendency to misrepresent in order to
please a possible employer. Lastly, his incentive need not be financial (a
"bribe"). It could be any one or combination of a number of things, including
power, prestige, or even misplaced ethical values (values that he thought were
right, even if they were, in fact, not). Again, all this is not to say that
Taylor is guilty of such an offense. But it should not be so quickly ruled
out.
-- Rich
Goldberg Silver Spring, Md.
Country
Road, Take Me Home
It may be the last publicly
acceptable stereotype in American journalism: the Appalachian. "Dear
Prudence" disparaged this ethnic group with a statement that would be
regarded as reckless racism if written about African-Americans or some other
ethnic group. Prudie is not the only or the last to do this but only the
latest. I have observed these slurs on television, radio, and print sources. I
marvel at how supposedly sophisticated journalists can speak, write, or edit
such transparently untrue and vicious statements.
You can
and should do better than this.
-- Steve
Booth-Butterfield Morgantown, W.Va.
How Much
Is That Hund in the Window?
Apparently Mark Steyn ("The Worst Songwriter of All Time") has never heard the truly worst
of all time. I have. While stationed in Germany during 1954 and '55, I heard
German radio play "Wieviel kostet der Hund im Fenster? " Wow!
-- Mort
Weintraub
Address
your e-mail to the editors to [email protected]. Please include your address and daytime phone
number (for confirmation only).
