Linda Greenhouse: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz
(Further, removed "quotes" from footnotes, something else I see as a sneaky way to introduce opinion)
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz
(See talk page about more non-neutrality)
Line 23: Line 23:


Greenhouse's husband, [[Eugene R. Fidell]], is also a lawyer -- a specialist in military law.
Greenhouse's husband, [[Eugene R. Fidell]], is also a lawyer -- a specialist in military law.
He has been a critic of the [[George W. Bush|Bush]] [[United States President|Presidency]]'s policy on captives taken in the "[[war on terror]]".<ref name=TheArmyLawyerMilitaryCommissionLaw>
He has been a critic of the [[George W. Bush|Bush]] [[United States President|Presidency]]'s policy on captives taken in the [[war on terror]].<ref name=TheArmyLawyerMilitaryCommissionLaw>
{{cite news
{{cite news
| url=http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/law/mil-commiss-law.pdf
| url=http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/law/mil-commiss-law.pdf
Line 63: Line 63:
| date=Tuesday, January 22, 2008
| date=Tuesday, January 22, 2008
| accessdate=2008-01-25
| accessdate=2008-01-25
| quote=
 
Whelan didn't point to any concrete problem with Greenhouse's handling of these cases. That should be easier to do than with almost any other reporter, given that Greenhouse relies primarily on court filings and oral arguments that are publicly available in their entirety, as Yale law professor Judith Resnik points out to us. Unable to point to any actual bias, Whelan resorts to the petulant claim that the effect of Fidell's involvement in the detainee cases 'would be impossible to separate … from the broader political bias that pervades so much of Greenhouse's reporting.'
}}</ref>
}}</ref>
According to Bazelon and Lithwick the main critic of Greenhouse covering stories where her husband Fidell has a role is [[M. Edward Whelan III]] of the ''[[National Review]].  They wrote: {{quotation|Unable to point to any actual bias, Whelan resorts to the petulant claim that the effect of Fidell's involvement in the detainee cases "would be impossible to separate … from the broader political bias that pervades so much of Greenhouse's reporting."}}
According to Bazelon and Lithwick the main critic of Greenhouse covering stories where her husband Fidell has a role is [[M. Edward Whelan III]] of the ''[[National Review]].  They wrote: {{quotation|Unable to point to any actual bias, Whelan resorts to the petulant claim that the effect of Fidell's involvement in the detainee cases "would be impossible to separate … from the broader political bias that pervades so much of Greenhouse's reporting."}}

Revision as of 16:59, 6 December 2008

This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
This editable Main Article is under development and subject to a disclaimer.
(CC) Photo: Chris Haynes
Add image caption here.

Linda Greenhouse is a Pullitzer Prize winning legal journalist, who wrote for the New York Times from 1968 to early 2008.[1] Greenhouse began covering the United States Supreme Court in 1972[2] and has appeared as a legal expert on various television news shows. She was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in Journalism (Beat Reporting) in 1998 "for her consistently illuminating coverage of the United States Supreme Court."

Covering the Supreme Court's rulings on Guantanamo captives

Greenhouse's husband, Eugene R. Fidell, is also a lawyer -- a specialist in military law. He has been a critic of the Bush Presidency's policy on captives taken in the war on terror.[3][4]

On January 20, 2008 Clark Hoyt, of the New York Times described Fidell holding back in participating in preparing a brief submitted to the Supreme Court on behalf of National Institute of Military Justice and the Bar Association of the District of Columbia because of the concern it would be considered a conflict of interest, due to his wife covering the case.[5]

On January 22, 2008 Slate magazine, published an article written by Emily Bazelon and Dahlia Lithwick, criticizing the New York Times for failing to show more support for their employee.[6]

According to Bazelon and Lithwick the main critic of Greenhouse covering stories where her husband Fidell has a role is M. Edward Whelan III of the National Review. They wrote:

Unable to point to any actual bias, Whelan resorts to the petulant claim that the effect of Fidell's involvement in the detainee cases "would be impossible to separate … from the broader political bias that pervades so much of Greenhouse's reporting."

Resignation

Greenhouse and the New York Times negotiated a buyout and voluntary resignation in late February 2008.[1] The New York Times had announced a plan to trim 100 staff members, and had asked staff to consider volunteering for a buyout.

References