New York Times public editor wants to know if paper should stop printing lies

The New York Times public editor asks:

I’m looking for reader input on whether and when New York Times news reporters should challenge “facts” that are asserted by newsmakers they write about.

….

Is that the prevailing view? And if so, how can The Times do this in a way that is objective and fair? Is it possible to be objective and fair when the reporter is choosing to correct one fact over another?

What’s interesting about the state of news media in this country are two basically paradoxical facts:

1. people expect newspapers to report the facts and dispel the non-facts, and
2. news media outlets are so obsessed with “fair reporting” and not pissing off sources that they hide from accusing anybody of lying.

It’s been a problem for a long time. What’s even worse is that saying something ridiculously false, if you’re a newsworthy personality (ie. running for higher office), gets more your publicity than being reasonable, and nobody is actually going to call you a liar in the news section. Sure, some op-ed columnist will say something to the effect of “this guy is lying,” but people ignore the columnists because they expect them to be partisan.

So, to answer the public editor:

FUCK YES JESUS FUCKING CHRIST I CAN’T BELIEVE YOU HAVE TO ASK*

*Actually I can.

Related posts:

1. WikiLeaks drops a new mixtape on totally suspecting public
2. New York Times Columnist Line of the Day
3. New York Times Columnist Line of the Day