The New York Times > International > Middle East > From the Editors: The Times and Iraq:
But we have found a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been. In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged. Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged — or failed to emerge.
This is welcome: a frank and detailed review of the Times’ war coverage with examples of where issues were missed and where stories were mistakenly downplayed.
When the newspaper of record steps up to it’s obligations, can we hope for our leaders to do the same?