WSJ On Why They Joined The Times On SWIFT Story

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Annie, Jun 30, 2006.

  1. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    I think they were wrong. At the same time, as the following points out, they have excercised better judgement in the past. A pass, no. An acknowledged mistake, yeah:

    http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008585
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. Stephanie
    Offline

    Stephanie Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    70,236
    Thanks Received:
    10,818
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +27,360
    TOO LATE WSJ, as far as I'm concerned....
    hummmmm. Compare the two paragraphs below... One is from the Journal and the other is from the NYTs....




    As most of our readers know, there is a large wall between the news and opinion operations of this paper, and we were not part of the news side's debates about whether to publish the latest story under contention — a report about how the government tracks international financial transfers through a banking consortium known as Swift in an effort to pinpoint terrorists. Bill Keller, the executive editor, spoke for the newsroom very clearly. Our own judgments about the uproar that has ensued would be no different if the other papers that published the story, including The Los Angeles Times and The Wall Street Journal, had acted alone.

    Do these two paragraphs look similar?? The one above is from the NYT that was posted here a couple of days ago. The one below is from the WSJ posted here today.........
    Pass the buck baby...


    We should make clear that the News and Editorial sections of the Journal are separate, with different editors. The Journal story on Treasury's antiterror methods was a product of the News department, and these columns had no say in the decision to publish. We have reported the story ourselves, however, and the facts are that the Times's decision was notably different from the Journal's.


    CALL, WRITE, CANCEL
    Hit them where it hurts...In their WALLET
     
  3. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    I already cancelled my print version. I've been ticked with them on the immigration issue for a long time. One thing I'll say for the WSJ, they don't just print the truly nativist responses, but really go for the more reasoned ones. They still keep hammering their POV, but they let the other side present their arguements also.
     
  4. waltky
    Offline

    waltky Wise ol' monkey Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    20,898
    Thanks Received:
    1,792
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Okolona, KY
    Ratings:
    +3,888
    Cyberthieves usin' SWIFT to launder money?...
    [​IMG]
    Special Report: Cyber thieves exploit banks' faith in SWIFT transfer network
    Fri May 20, 2016 | Shortly after 7 p.m. on January 12, 2015, a message from a secure computer terminal at Banco del Austro (BDA) in Ecuador instructed San Francisco-based Wells Fargo to transfer money to bank accounts in Hong Kong.
    See also:

    SWIFT tells banks to share information on hacks
    May 20, 2016) - International financial messaging service SWIFT told clients on Friday to share information on attacks on the system to help prevent hackings, after criminals used SWIFT messages to steal $81 million from the Bangladesh central bank.
     

Share This Page