Dems 2008: It’s the NYT’s story and they’re sticking to it [Karl]
The main campaign story atÃ‚Â New York Times right now is about Al Gore possibly playing the “honest broker” for a peaceful resolution to whatÃ‚Â could be aÃ‚Â battle royale between Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton over the Democratic presidential nomination.
But how honest is the New York Times?
First, the Gore-y part:
Democratic Party officials said that in the past week Mr. Gore and other leading Democrats had held private talks as worry mounted that the close race between Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton could be decided by a group of 796 party insiders known as superdelegates.
But the caption to the picture accompanying the story reads as follows:
Senator Barack Obama, center, is now supported by Representative John Lewis, right, a superdelegate, seen with him last year.
And in the text of the story itself, there is this:
Both the Clinton and Obama campaigns are aggressively lobbying the superdelegates, a battle that received new attention after Representative John Lewis of Georgia, who had endorsed Mrs. Clinton, said late Thursday that he would cast his superdelegate ballot for Mr. Obama if the battle for the nomination went to the convention.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports a different story:
Lewis’ spokeswoman would only say that the New York Times report that Lewis would back Obama was “inaccurate,” but provided no details and did not respond to requests for more. Jeff Zeleny, the Times reporter who interviewed Lewis on Thursday, later told CNN that Lewis “unequivocally” said he would support Obama.
It is one thing for the New York Times to stand by its reporting.Ã‚Â It is quite another thing for the paper to ignore the dispute over its reporting.