Letter to NY Times Public Editor Calame.

Readers' Note: Below is an open email letter to NY Times public editor Byron Calame. John in Carolina regulars know the background. Newcomers will quickly pick it up from the letter and links.

If after reading the letter, you wish to send a message to Calame his email address is: public@nytimes.com

I hope you'll contact him.
______________________________________________________________

To: Byron Calame
Public Editor
NY Times

Five months ago the New York Times published an op-ed charging the Army systematically lies to young West Point graduates ( ''The Not-So-Long Gray Line,'' June 28). (Full text of op-ed available only to Times Select subscribers)

Only anecdotes were offered to support the lying charge. With one exception, they can’t be verified because names and other necessary identifying information aren’t provided.

The exception is this paragraph:

There was a time when the Army did not have a problem retaining young leaders - men like Dwight Eisenhower, George Patton, George Marshall, Omar Bradley and my grandfather, Lucian K. Truscott Jr. Having endured the horrors of World War I trenches, these men did not run headlong out of the Army in the 1920's and 30's when nobody wanted to think of the military, much less pay for it. They had made a pact with each other and with their country, and all sides were going to keep it.

As you surely know by now, the claims made in that paragraph are false.

Eisenhower, Bradley and Truscott never served overseas during WWI; Marshall was in France as a staff officer; and only Patton saw combat. I don’t know of any historian who’s ever claimed the five future generals made any sort of pact with each other.

On June 29 I sent you a lengthy email that noted the false claims and cited widely respected and available sources that leave no doubt the claims are false. I requested a correction and explanation for why the Times published such blatant falsehoods

I posted the email at my blog, www.johnincarolina.com

On July 7, I sent you an updated email/post after the Times’ acknowledged on July 6 that one of its editors had inserted material into an op-ed that the op-ed author hadn’t intended to be there.

Following the Times July 6 acknowledgement, I thought it would move quickly to correct and explain the falsehoods in its June 28 op-ed because readers would now be asking not only why the Times published false statements about the generals but who had in fact authored them.

I received from your office formal acknowledgements of receipt of both emails but nothing more until Nov. 17, when Betsy Newmark, guest blogging at Michelle Malkin, posted on the falsehoods.

On the day Newmark’s post appeared, I was able to speak twice to your Associate, Joseph Plambeck. He was familiar with my requests and assured me you would take a close look at them and be back in touch within a few days.

I've heard nothing.

I was happy to give you a few days more but don’t you agree five months are now time enough?

Editorial Page Editor Gail Collins recently assured readers the Times corrects “all errors.” She added:

We want to cultivate the reflex that automatically fixes any inaccuracy, without whining. But mistakes of significance are much more urgent than minor ones. They need to be corrected quickly, and in a way that guarantees the fix is seen by as many people who read the original piece as possible.

If Collins and the Times are credible, why haven't we had a correction and explanation of blatant falsehoods in a Times op-ed accusing the Army of lying?

Sincerely,

John
www.johnincarolina.com