A few items I had been meaning to get to sooner over the past two weeks:
Misstep? A Times article on President Obama's nomination of Gayle Smith to be the administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development says of Ms. Smith's predecessor, Rajiv Shah:
But Dr. Shah had missteps as well. The Associated Press reported in 2014 that during his tenure, U.S.A.I.D. operated a social media account to encourage young Cubans to revolt against the Castro government. The secret program ran out of funds in 2012, after two years; Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, called it "dumb, dumb, dumb" after it was disclosed.
This wording seems to side with Senator Leahy in characterizing the Cuba effort as a "misstep"; a pretty clear case of left-wing opinion creeping into what is supposed to be a news article.
Correction of the Month: From the May 1 Times:
Because of an editing error, an article on Tuesday about the closing of the Carnegie Deli after the discovery of a tapped gas line misstated the reason anonymity was granted to a law enforcement official who said the follow-up investigation was an example of a more cooperative approach between Con Edison and city officials. It was because the investigation is continuing, not because the official wanted to avoid angering City Hall.
This is pretty funny for a number of reasons. First, the article didn't give a "reason anonymity was granted." It gave a reason the source "insisted an [sic] anonymity." The Times may not realize it, but those are two different things. Second, how did the editor get the impression that the official "wanted to avoid angering City Hall"? Was that reason strictly imaginary? In most cases whatever reporters, editors, and readers can know about the motives of anonymous sources is both anonymous and based on their say-so. At a certain point it becomes absurd: "The source insisted on anonymity to discuss his reasons for insisting on anonymity, for fear that if he went on the record to explain why he needed anonymity, it would reveal his identity."
Cuomo's error: Capital New York points out an error — as yet uncorrected by the Times — in Andrew Cuomo's Times op-ed calling for increased wages for fast-food workers.
Nail Salons: Reason's Elizabeth Nolan Brown has a thoughtful response to the Times' two-part series investigating conditions of workers at nail salons.