Jan
08
2009

How Does the New York Times Think Massacres Should Be Covered?

Peter Hart asked the New York Times:

What should TV reporting of a civilian massacre look like, exactly?

Well, I guess the Times thinks they should be covered this way:

Extra!: How America's Leading Paper Covered a Massacre

…which is to say, they should be covered almost exclusively from the point of view of the community that the perpetrators of the massacres come from, with virtually no perspective from the people who are being massacred. Of course, this may depend upon the identity of the massacre victims.

About Jim Naureckas

Extra! Magazine Editor Since 1990, Jim Naureckas has been the editor of Extra!, FAIR's monthly journal of media criticism. He is the co-author of The Way Things Aren't: Rush Limbaugh's Reign of Error, and co-editor of The FAIR Reader: An Extra! Review of Press and Politics in the '90s. He is also the co-manager of FAIR's website. He has worked as an investigative reporter for the newspaper In These Times, where he covered the Iran-Contra scandal, and was managing editor of the Washington Report on the Hemisphere, a newsletter on Latin America. Jim was born in Libertyville, Illinois, in 1964, and graduated from Stanford University in 1985 with a bachelor's degree in political science. Since 1997 he has been married to Janine Jackson, FAIR's program director. You can follow Jim on Twitter at @JNaureckas.