'N.Y. Times' Correction Causes Other Papers that Ran Stories to Scramble for Explanation

By: Joe Strupp Many newspapers that have carried some or all of The New York Times' stories on Iraq that were cited for flaws in a critical editor's note Wednesday are scrambling to explain the paper's mea culpa to readers.

Since more than 300 newspapers nationwide subscribe to The New York Times News Service, the paper's revelation that at least six stories on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were problematic is being felt across the country.

Some editors appear miffed that they ran the Times' correction today in a prominent position while the Times itself stuck it in the lower left hand corner of Page A10, without even a front-page teaser.

"We ran two of the (Iraq) stories in question on Page One and we have run a lot of New York Times material," said Doug Clifton, editor of The Plain Dealer in Cleveland. His paper ran today's editors' note on Page 2. "We didn't want to be accused of sweeping it under the rug," he explained.

Calls to the Times were not returned Wednesday.

Clifton also criticized the Times for not alerting editors until 10 p.m. Tuesday about the note. "A correction ought not be one of those things you have to deal with as breaking news,"Clifton said. "They knew about this for a while. It is sort of bothersome that they did not put any advisories out." He also questioned the Times' decision to run the note on A10 without a Page One reference.

Laurence Paul, executive editor of the Times News Service, said no advisory went out on the editor's note because "it was kept under close wraps inside the company to avoid the premature disclosures of our content that have been happening in recent months."

At the San Jose Mercury News -- which had published five of the stories cited in the note -- Editor David Yarnold chose to run the explanation on Page 3, with a "sizeable Page One refer."

"I think we handled it very responsibly," Yarnold said, adding that he also questioned why the Times did not give it more play. "I think that was a bad decision. It is as though they are trying not to call attention to it."

At other newspapers that use Times News Service stories, such as The Sun in Baltimore and the San Francisco Chronicle, editors were still deciding Wednesday how to handle the explanation in their pages. "I think running the note is probably a good idea," said Phil Bronstein, editor of the Chronicle, which had not reported on the note and was still reviewing which stories it might have run. "I'm sure we ran several of them, but we are still reviewing it."

Rex Seline, managing editor/news at the Fort Worth (Tex.) Star-Telegram, said his paper planned to run some kind of note on the issue in Thursday's paper. "We did run a couple of those stories," he said.

Ellen Soeteber, editor of the St. Louis (Mo.) Post-Dispatch, also acknowledged a need to explain the situation to readers, but had not determined what the paper would do. "I'm still trying to digest this,"she told E&P. "We will need to explain to the readers that we ran X number of those New York Times stories."


Charles Geraci contributed to this report.