Monday, October 24, 2005
Judy Attacks NY Times From NY Post
It's rapidly becoming apparent that Judith Miller's chances at returning to do whatever it is that she did at The New York Times aren't looking too good.
First, The Times' Executive Editor Bill Keller, in a leaked message to his staff, rued sleeping through "significant alarm bells" which prevented him from "prob[ing] deeper" and allowed Judy Miller to mislead the Washington Bureau Chief "about the extent of her involvement" and "entanglement with Libby."
Then, columnist Maureen Dowd accused Judy (Times Select link or not) of being the "Fourth Estate's Becky Sharp" who drove many Times reporters "crazy" with "her tropism toward powerful men;" which some take to mean that Judy whored her way to the top and some not.
Finally, The Times' Public Editor, Byron Calame, opined that "the problems facing her inside and outside the newsroom will make it difficult for her to return to the paper as a reporter."
Robert Bennett, Miller's attorney, told the Associated Press that the multi-pronged New York Times assault was "shameless."
"They should be praising her for doing what they wanted, for going to jail for 85 days to uphold an important principle, which she did," he said. "They are not treating her very well and I think it's very disgraceful."
Perhaps Judith Miller will be looking for a new employer, soon.
Perhaps Judith Miller should ask Rupert Murdoch if he's hiring.
In today's copy of the Murdoch-owned New York Post, Judith Miller talks back to The Times:
"I'm not mad, I'm sad," Judy told me from her home on Long Island.
"Isn't it sad that, after going to jail for 85 days for a principle, it's come to this?"....
Judy will not take on her colleagues as personally as they've maligned her. "Believe it or not, I can be pretty mild. I'm not going to sink to that level," she said.
"But if someone says I'm a liar, I'm going to say I'm not a liar.
"If someone says I misled an editor, I'm going to tell you I did not mislead an editor. I never misled anyone.
"I did nothing wrong. I'm not ashamed. I'm proud of the decision I made to go to jail."
As far as I'm aware, no one has ever accused Judith Miller of being "mild" but she does make a small point - though not the one she intends.
It is sad that The New York Times has resorted to pettiness instead of just out-and-out firing this albatross who speaks, writes and reports largely in code.
It's kind of unseemly to attack your co-worker or employee (the bosses are always fair game). Kick her to the curb and then maybe the critics will ease up on the non-stop Times criticism.
Unless Miller's officially cut loose from Sulzerberger's long-as-all-hell leash all the apologies and regrets in the world are not going to carry much weight.
The Times can't do much about the illegal, immoral invasion that they helped enable...but they can give us a reason to trust them again.
Fire Judith Miller. And let her go work for the cheerleading factory at Fox if she wants.
(I'm not sure if Andrea Peyser is still "Columnist Of The Year" but I'm certainly not one of her fans. The same columnist who employed terms such as “diva,” “dominatrix,” “queen,” and “broad” to describe Martha Stewart in a series of slam pieces - that even went so far as to wish prison rape on her - calls Dowd's op-ed a "remarkably sexist column," yet, in the same freaking sentence even, tells us that Dowd "scratched out Judy's eyes" and "bitched" about her. There's something seriously wrong with Andrea Peyser and if I were a "remarkably sexist" blogger I might say something inappropriate, so, instead, I'll leave that to whatever my readers want to say in the comments section.)