Remedial Education for the New York Times

The New York Times needs a little remedial help in understanding the relationship between public relations and journalism. At least, that's the impression I take away from its 7600-word article about sinister government efforts to influence news coverage about the war in Iraq. Why, would you believe it, the Times has discovered that the Pentagon actually seeks out favorable coverage from military analysts! Shocking!

Or maybe not. I've read a lot of hyperventilating stories about this in the past few days on both sides of the issue. I think the best response, from the PR side, comes in the Bulldog Reporter's Daily Dog from Ronn Torossian, the President and CEO of 5W Public Relations:

For me, it's a given that all organizations (including the U.S. military) attempt to "spin" what the public sees and educate and influence spokespeople who appear in the media. It's not deception any more than the political candidates who are trained to respond in a certain way, nonprofit organizations that routinely use one set of statistics instead of another or CEOs who are media trained on a daily basis by their PR firms.

Right. Read the whole thing. I'm afraid I have to agree with John Podhoretz writing for Commentary Magazine:

I think, based on many years of experience working at various newspapers, that there is an explanation for the extreme length — 7800 words — of the story and the fact that it manages to find nothing more than an effort by the Pentagon to get good coverage. The Times thought it was on to something very big, ended up with something very small, and then took what little they had and tried to make a silk purse from the sow’s ear that was reporter David Barstow’s investigation.

Public Relations is an exercise in presenting the best possible face to the world. Favoring those who help you is part of the game. If the New York Times weren't wearing its ideological blinders, they would acknowledge it.