I just got this breaking news update (as I’m sure many of you did) from the New York Times online about New York Governor David Patterson’s alleged role in a domestic dispute. I’ve pasted the full text of the email I received below. The last paragraph, in particular, disturbed me. What happened to unbiased journalism? It seemed to me as though the Times was trying to use potentially salacious, though as yet unproven, details of the case to garner readers, something I think the MSM has built a reputation for NOT doing to the same extent that new media sources (especially more openly slanted blogs) do. I’m curious to hear how other people view the last paragraph of this update. Do you think the Times overstepped the boundaries of objectivity, or is this sort of speculation just part of the business?
Complaint Against Paterson Aide Raises Questions of Influence
Last fall, a woman went to court in the Bronx to testify that
she had been violently assaulted by David W. Johnson, a top
aide to Gov. David A. Paterson, and to seek a protective
order against him.
In the ensuing months, she returned to court twice to press
her case, and complaining that the State Police had been
harassing her to drop it. The State Police, which had no
jurisdiction in the matter, confirmed that the woman was
visited by a member of the governor’s personal security
Then early this month, days before she was due to return to
court to seek a final protective order, the woman got a phone
call from the governor, according to her lawyer. She failed
to appear for her next hearing on Feb. 8, and as a result her
case was dismissed.
Many details of the governor’s role in this episode are
unclear or in dispute, but accounts portray a brutal
encounter, a frightened woman and an effort to make a
potential political embarrassment go away.