JOIN BREITBART. Takes 2 seconds.

NYT Runs In Circles With Excuses For Fast And Furious Coverage


I received another email from Mr. Brock from The New York Times and I have to admit I am shocked, but very thankful he is still corresponding with me. However, his latest response isn’t getting us anywhere and we’re just running in circles about their coverage about Operation Fast and Furious.

Here is Mr. Brock’s response.

Dear Ms. Chastain:

I think it is clear at this point that whatever we do on this coverage is not going to please you. So I am not going to keep going into details on this. But, yes, we did update the article — as we often do with numerous articles. In fact, that’s the entire point of the Web site: to keep refreshing it. So you will see time stamps change all the time. At any rate, here are some details that might interest you, since your original note said that you saw coverage everywhere.

The following papers had nothing in their print editions about the subpoenas: The Washington Post, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Daily News and The Boston Globe.

Besides The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times published 3 sentences — the same three it put on the Web — the New York Post wrote an article and Newsday of Long Island printed a version of a Chicago Tribune article (so obviously the Tribune had a story.)

I think our coverage was timely and the space we devoted to it was appropriate to the development. Once you say the subpoenas were issued — action that had already been threatened — there wasn’t a lot to say.

We will continue to cover this story as we feel there are legitimate developments. Again, I am sorry that we are not able to meet your needs. Perhaps others can. But judging from the coverage of the subpoenas, you may have to hunt and hunt to find something sufficient.

Best regards,


I was honestly shocked by this answer because he tried to distract me with other media sources who didn’t do their job properly. Is that an excuse for The New York Times to be skimpy on their coverage about the subpoena? No. Actually the Times should be better than any other newspaper outlet. There was also plenty to say: why not explain exactly what the House Oversight Committee wants? Why not explain all the details about Operation Fast and Furious? Why not explain that one of these guns caused the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry?

Here is my response to him. I explain to him that the majority of us do not read the print edition of any newspaper. We prefer the websites.

Dear Mr. Brock:

First off thank you very much for continuing correspondence with me. Thank you for explaining the time stamps on your website. I appreciate it.

I’m actually going to a lot of the mainstream media and asking for more coverage. I’m not just asking you and The New York Times, but I am concentrating more on you because you are The New York Times. The Times is known as the go to source for the news and I know the world goes to the Times for news on America. So yes I am holding you guys to a higher standard. Plus it’s not just me who isn’t pleased. It’s a LOT of people I talk to about it.

I also know a lot of people who don’t read the print edition of any newspaper. I don’t. I prefer to look at the websites because it is more convenient and less trash. I actually gave up the print editions when I became a mom. Plus, like you said, the websites are constantly updating.

However, a subpoena for the attorney general of the United States of America deserves more than a blurb. There was lots to say like Congressman Issa’s complete statement and maybe a background into the investigation and operation. I’m seriously trying to understand why the subpoena of this attorney general is not as big of a deal as Attorney General Gonzales’s subpoena. Like I said I’m not just asking The New York Times. I’m asking a lot of the mainstream media.

It just seems that whenever there was a tiny development in Mr. Gonzales’s case the mainstream media reported it. Whenever a member of Congress said something about him the mainstream media reported it. So many people wrote editorials on it.

If you can’t answer these questions Mr. Brock please forward them to someone who can. Please. I need to know why Operation Fast and Furious is not receiving the coverage it deserves.



I’m sick of getting the run around about very simple questions. I really do hope Mr. Brock forwards me to someone who can answer my questions. I’m not going to stop until we receive the proper coverage of Operation Fast and Furious. As soon as I receive a response from Mr. Brock or anyone at the Times I’ll update you guys here at Big Journalism. Stay tuned!


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.