From Editor & Publisher.com :
Why the 'L.A. Times' Called for Iraq Pullout
Few American papers of any size have called for a reversal of course in Iraq, so it was a shock to see one of the largest, the Los Angeles Times, take this step recently. How does the editorial page editor explain this sudden change in heart -- and will others finally follow?
By Greg Mitchell
(June 13, 2007)
“I see no moral reason to wait until fall,” Jim Newton, editorial page editor at the Los Angeles Times told me earlier today. “We need to evaluate in real time. That’s part of the motivation for the editorial this week. Besides Gen. Petraeus, others have a right to assess the facts as well.”
Newton was referring to an editorial in his paper on Tuesday calling for peace talks and a ceasefire in Iraq. It’s the kind of talk we heard often in relation to Vietnam and later conflicts but oddly missing in regard to Iraq. But the Times is taking all sorts of bold stands on the war these days. Six weeks ago the paper advocated – hold on to your hats – that the U.S. actually start to disengage in Iraq. That editorial was titled simply, if eloquently, “Bring Them Home.”
Rather than chide the vast majority of newspaper editorial pages, yet again, for continuing to endorse, or at least accept, the continuing (now expanding) U.S. mission in Iraq, I am happy to tip my hat to the only ultra-large paper that has come out for the start of an American pullout. That position, until now, has been left to papers such as the Seattle Times, Minneapolis Star Tribune, Orange County Register and Roanoke Times.
What’s happening at the L.A. paper, which as recently as January backed the “surge”? It’s as if a little-noted earthquake struck Spring Street this spring and really shook things up.
[click link below to continue reading]
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/columns/pressingissues_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003598764
Wrap...
No comments:
Post a Comment