Friday, 18 July 2008

Are American newspapers aggressive enough?

The NYT does a stand-up job of off the news reporting, publishing long self-lacerating reports about when it has been duped, but twice in one day, we have brining to my attention big stories about the American 'pouvoir' coming from UK newspapers.

Here's another one:

White House calls Bush fund-raiser's actions 'inappropriate'
WASHINGTON: The White House has disavowed the actions of a major fund-raiser for George W. Bush's presidential campaigns who was caught on videotape apparently trying to trade access to top administration officials - including Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice - in exchange for six-figure donations to Bush's library foundation.The fund-raiser, Stephen Payne, founder of Worldwide Strategic Partners in Houston, was shown suggesting the donations in a video posted Sunday on the Web site of The Times of London, which filmed him surreptitiously as part of an investigation into corruption in foreign governments.Payne, apparently believing he was talking to a representative of the former president of Kyrgyzstan, was shown saying that he could arrange meetings with top administration officials but that a meeting with the president himself would be difficult. The newspaper also posted photographs of Payne cutting brush with Bush at the president's ranch in Texas and shooting skeet with Cheney."I think the family, the children, whatever, should probably look at making a contribution to the Bush library," Payne says on the tape, adding: "It would be like, maybe a couple hundred thousand dollars, or something like that, not a huge amount but enough to show that they're serious. They haven't started raising the money yet, but they will in the next couple of months."Bush's press secretary, Dana Perino, called Payne's actions "inappropriate" and said that he did not represent the library or the foundation raising money for it.

Just one small question: Today is Friday, the article above refers to a posting made on The Times of London site last SUNDAY.

This is what I mean about getting it right, not being first. Were they checking to see if the story was legit? Or simply being too deferential, too cautious, too slow, too late.

No comments: