The New York Times is continuing to receive criticism for its relative lack of coverage of the trial of alleged WikiLeaks leaker Bradley Manning.
The paper of record was singled out for its failure to send a reporter to the military courtroom where Manning was challenging his confinement. Manning said that the treatment he received while being held at various military jails amounted to torture.
Though many high-profile news outlets -- from the AP to CNN to the Guardian -- sent journalists to the trial, the Times held back.
After articles in The New Republic and elsewhere noted this, Margaret Sullivan, the paper's public editor, wrote a blog post criticizing the decision.
Washington bureau chief David Leonhardt told her that he had decided that, "as with any other legal case, we won't cover every single proceeding."
The Times wound up sending a reporter to the court after the criticism, but Sullivan still took the paper to task in her print column on Sunday.
"As a matter of news judgment, giving so little coverage to the hearing is simply weird," she wrote. "This is a compelling story, and an important one ... If there had been a will to cover the Manning testimony, a staff reporter could have been found."
Sullivan also noted that, as the alleged WikiLeaks leaker, Manning was actually one of the most prominent sources the Times has ever had. The paper published scores of articles based on WikiLeaks material.
Related
Before You Go
