Wednesday, March 01, 2006

How quickly a story changes.

And how disappointing it obviously is to the reporter.

Mudville has this:

"On February 24, as U.S. media hysteria reached it's peak in the wake of the shrine bombing in Iraq, the New York Times declared in a banner headline that More Clashes Shake Iraq; Political Talks Are in Ruins. Not jeopardized, not threatened, but ruined. All hopes dashed, over, fini, kaput. Stick a fork in it. The Iraqi Consensus Front, a key Sunni Arab political bloc, had pulled out of talks to form a government with the Shiite and Kurdish parties. According to the Times, civil war was looming - perhaps had even begun.


It had to be painful for the same reporter to file this story with the Times 48 hours later

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Feb. 26 — Leaders of the main Sunni Arab political bloc have decided to return to suspended talks over the formation of a new government, the top Sunni negotiator said Sunday. The step could help defuse the sectarian tensions that threatened to spiral into open civil war last week after the bombing of a Shiite shrine and the killings of Sunnis in reprisal.

Could defuse the tensions. Maybe. Possibly. Might. Because, it's not that big a deal, I guess.

Same reporter for both stories, by the way. Ed Wong - the Times has been passing off his deeply flawed analysis as actual news for quite some time."