The weekend was a rollercoaster for the NYT gas reporter and his gas beat. On saturday, he had a story in which he crowed that his June 26th story painting the shale gas industry as a Ponzi scheme filled with Enrons had triggered an SEC investigation of one or more unnamed gas companies.
Then Sunday bought a deep, stomach-churning drop when the Public Editor of the NYT for an incredible second time chastised the NYT gas reporter for manipulations that mislead readers.
The June 27th story charging the Energy Information Administration with cooking the shale gas data books was this time the object of the Public Editor's Sunday, July 31st chastisement. The Public Editor on July 17th had heavily criticized the NYT gas reporter and his June 26th story.
That is an extraordinary two strikes from the NYT Public Editor. Both pieces focus on techniques--huge use of anonymous sources, misleading descriptors of sources to inflate their credibility with readers, leaving out key information contradicting the narrative told--that the NYT gas reporter uses consistently in his gas reporting.
The two broadsides from the NYT Public Editor are warnings to readers interested in the truth and to guardians of journalistic integrity. Yet, who are those guardians at the NYT?
To catch up and stay current on the saga of the NYT Gas Reporter, please see the Statements posted on Saturday and Sunday.