More Media Bashing

Question one: Take a far left agenda, combine it with a generous amount of blind hubris, and remove all traces of ethical responsibility and what do you have? Answer: The Los Angeles Times under its current führer, John Carroll.

Question two: Are the numerous factual errors in the Times' news reportage innocent or are they indicative of a feverish propaganda effort? According to Slate:

On July 4, an LAT front page piece reported that our civilian administrator for Iraq, Paul Bremer

left without even giving a final speech to the country — almost as if he were afraid to look in the eye the people he had ruled for more than a year

when in fact Bremer did give a farewell speech, which was well-received by at least some Iraqis. [links omitted]

Answer: The latter. The Times' editors, like many on the far left, seriously believe that ethics and integrity don't matter when you're in a battle against the evils of conservativism.

To the propagandists at the L.A. Times, the ends always justify the means. For example: Print lies about candidate Schwarzenneger on the eve of the election, while ignoring credible claims that Davis physically assaulted his female staffers? No problem. What do ethics matter when the goal is to stop the evil Republicans?

Just watch the L.A. Times as we get closer to the November election. We ain't seen nothing yet.

Slate link via Professor Hewitt.

Update: As reported at Powerline, The Times has offered a correction, but not an apology. i think an apology is in order when a major newspaper makes a false statement in a news story (as opposed to an op-ed) and then levels a cheap shot based on that false statement. It's not enough to simply retract the false statement and leave the cheap shot out there. But that's The Times, and that's why i wouldn't even read their sports page when i lived in L.A.

For more articulate L.A. Times bashing than i am able to muster, go on over to Patterico's Pontifications.