As CF notes below, the WashTimes belatedly removed a photo of the Obama children from a news article about murdered schoolchildren in Chicago. Why anybody at the right-wing newspaper thought it was a good idea to include the Obama kids, who played no role whatsoever in the news report, remains a mystery.
Now it's time for somebody at the WashTimes (paging John Solomon) to come forward and explain how such an egregious thing was done in the first place. To explain the thought process and the editorial judgment that was used to connect the dots between the Obama kids and murdered Chicago children. Who made that decision, how many editors in the course of putting the newspaper to bed saw the article and the photo and okayed it? Did anybody within the newsroom ever suggest the photo inclusion was a monumentally dumb idea?
I realize the Times probably doesn't want to face up to this issue publicly, but when newspapers fail this spectacularly there needs to be some accountability. And although it wasn't pleasant, the WashTimes did recently step forward and at least try to explain why it published a fictional editorial that derided Obama as being an historically unpopular president. (Hint: Pretty much the opposite is true.)
It's that time again at the WashTimes. It's time for a sign--any sign--that the newspaper still operates under some sort sort of adult supervision.
When editor John Solomon took over at the notoriously slanted newspaper, he announced that the daily was going to practice journalism that was "fair and balanced and accurate and precise." He stressed, "There needs to be a bright line between the journalism on the news pages and the commentary that appears on the editorial and opinion pages."
Stunts like yesterday's Obama children fiasco make a mockery out of that pledge.