June 26, 2006
McCormick II Posted by Joshua Zeitz at 11:50 AM EST John Steele Gordon’s last post comparing Robert McCormick, the legendary publisher of the Chicago Tribune, with the current regime at the New York Times was interesting. While I agree with Mr. Gordon that McCormick’s story dated June 7, 1942, concerning Japanese battle plans in the Pacific, was damaging to the Allied cause, I suppose my nomination for worst-ever McCormick leak was the Tribune’s article on December 4, 1941, revealing key elements of the government’s Victory Program, including proposed troop levels, potential theaters of engagement in Europe and the Pacific, and estimated war costs. But I guess it’s a toss-up. Either way you look at it, McCormick was a reckless and irresponsible publisher. I part ways with Mr. Gordon over his characterization of the NYT’s recent story on the Bush administration’s sweeping, warrantless probes of private bank accounts in the United States. Mr. Gordon claims that the article “endanger[ed] the national security of the United States and injure[d] the war effort.” But I just don’t see the parallel between McCormick, who blatantly leaked military plans for all of America’s friends and enemies to see, and the NYT, which exposed a sweeping covert policy of questionable legality. Mr. Gordon writes “The Times’s own story reports that the program is perfectly legal,” but nowhere does the NYT say this. The article cites administration officials who say the program is legal, but that is quite a far stretch from endorsing that position. In fact, the article outlines many of the legal gray areas and quotes numerous past and present government officials who are concerned about possible constitutional and statutory violations in the program’s conception and application. More to the point, the NYT has done nothing that jeopardizes American servicemen or compromises America’s military operations. Robert McCormick did precisely these things, and on several occasions.
|
