"There is nothing for us to correct ... We stand by our reporting." That was the innocuous enough position from Greg Brock, New York Times "Senior Editor/Standards," in reply to a Letter to the Editor sent to the Times by a reader of The BRAD BLOG requesting a correction to recent reportage from the "paper of record" concerning rightwing activist James O'Keefe, on the heels of his federal felony arrest late last month. O'Keefe was arrested in New Orleans as an alleged ringleader in a conspiracy with three others, attempting to gain access, for reasons still unknown, to the phone system of Louisiana's Democratic U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu.
Incredibly, Brock originally cited claims by Fox News and O'Keefe himself as sources for why the New York Times stood by their apparently unverified and apparently incorrect report. "We believe him," Brock wrote, because he said as much on Fox News, apparently.
But the matter went from the absurd to the ridiculous in fairly short order, as Brock then seemed to contradict himself by claiming their source wasn't actually Fox or O'Keefe, but that the Times stood by their reporting because of a mysterious, unpublished video said to back up the claim, along with testimony from ACORN employees.
Though both the video and statements from ACORN employees were cited as evidence their story was right, Brock would refuse to share evidence for either of the claims. That, even after an independent report from the former Attorney General of Massachusetts --- released in early December, but never mentioned in the Times' recent report (or any report at the paper to my knowledge) --- directly contradicts their reportage.
In short, the Times suggested in an article a week ago Sunday --- and at least seven others prior to it, all published after the release of the former MA Attorney General's report --- that O'Keefe was wearing his infamous pimp outfit inside the offices of ACORN while speaking to employees in his now-infamous hit videos. In actuality, according to the December 7th report by AG Scott Harshbarger, in direct contradiction to the Times reporting, he was not.
As Harshbarger writes:
Instead of acknowledging the Times' error, and the fact that the "paper of record" never seems to have even reported the findings of the Harshbarger report at all, the remarkable email thread with Brock, published in full below, devolves into absurdity. He went on to suggest he didn't actually speak for the Times; that his comments on their behalf in reply to a Letter to the Editor should not be published publicly; and that the video he claims to have seen which backs up the Times' reporting was never actually released publicly and couldn't be shared with me. Also, he explained, the interviews with ACORN employees, which he said described the pimp outfit that O'Keefe was wearing, were run elsewhere, not by the Times, though he was unable to cite exactly where it was that those comments were run.
The entire matter, after I eventually jumped into it myself in hopes of making sense of it all, would eventually include a request to the Times Public Editor, Clark Hoyt, to examine the puzzling "standards" applied by Brock, their "Senior Editor/Standards," in the entire bizarre affair.
That bizarre affair is likely best illustrated by the actual emails themselves, posted below, in order, in full. But first, the background as to what happened here, and why this particular original request from a reader, for an important correction from the "paper of record," is no small matter, particularly as the investigations move forward on O'Keefe's righwing dirty tricks schemes and several alleged state and federal crimes. The country and the bulk of the corporate media relies in no small part --- and apparently, at their own peril --- on the New York Times to get these sorts of stories right. If this incident is any indication, the country is in big trouble...




Exclusive: NYTimes Editor 'Stands Behind' O'Keefe 'Pimp' Story
FBI WHISTLEBLOWER SIBEL EDMONDS IN HUSTLER MAGAZINE
Opening Tea Bag Conference Speaker Tancredo Yearns for Jim Crow 'Literacy Tests'
O'Reilly's Interview With Stewart 'Unfairly and Deviously Edited'
VIDEO: House Rep Details How Lies by GOP Fraudsters Like John Fund Work

Credit Where It's Due:
You're welcome. My 2000+ word article on former FBI translator-turned-whistleblower Sibel Edmonds is now featured in the March 2010 edition of Hustler. Sorry, she's wearing all her clothes. Go buy it anyway.
Among the questions on one of those old
If you watched the two separate nights over which Bill O'Reilly cut up his O'Reilly Factor interview with Jon Stewart on Fox "News" this week, as we did, you probably found that both nights fell surprisingly flat, given that Stewart, at least, usually offers a reason to make these things "must watch" moments.
If you're not on Twitter (you can 
While I've always had the utmost respect for Australian journalist and documentary filmmaker
Perhaps it's an accumulation of all that has transpired this past year; perhaps it's the striking revelations that emerged during an extraordinary Feb. 2, 2010, broadcast of Democracy Now, especially as it pertains to torture (video below), but I now can't help feeling like Claire Kubik, the sharp attorney played by Ashley Judd in
Seriously, the Republican Party wasn't always 


AP's investigative unit produces an appropriate
Incredibly --- or perhaps not so much, given the various horrible news the week before last --- I completely lost track that last Sunday (1/24) was OUR SIXTH ANNIVERSARY here at
You folks do realize that James O'Keefe never actually wore his ridiculous pimp costume into those ACORN offices on those doctored and illegally recorded video tapes, right? But, rather, he was filmed outside of the offices wearing his get-up, while appearing as the conservatively dressed boyfriend of a hooker trying to escape an abusive pimp when the cameras were rolling inside the offices. That's just one of many deceptions O'Keefe carried out.


























