In the controversy over the L.A. Times‘s deletion of information about a satellite recording from two Reuters stories about the shooting of the car with Giuliana Sgrena, the Iron Teakettle says I am missing the forest for the trees:
He [Patterico] could have speculated whether CBS News is no longer credible as a source to other news organizations and whether the L.A. Times wanted to confirm the CBS story independently before citing it. Is there any editor who is not thanking his lucky stars that he did not follow CBS’s lead on the fake Bush National Guard memos?
Interesting angle. We know the deletion was not attributable to any general reluctance on the part of L.A. Times editors to republish allegations made by other news organizations’ anonymous sources. Recall that, when CBS News based a 60 Minutes story about President Bush’s TANG service upon documents obtained from an anonymous source, the L.A. Times splashed the story on its front page.
Maybe the L.A. Times is reluctant to repeat that mistake, now that the reputation of CBS News has been so badly damaged by the forged documents controversy.
Or maybe CBS’s anonymous sources are just considered more reliable by Times editors when they skewer President Bush than when they defend soldiers’ actions in Iraq.
Maybe we’ll find out the real reason when (if?) the editors respond to my recent query on the issue . . .