New York Times: It's America's fault!

Only a day after we discovered the brutal slaying of an American in Iraq, the New York Times made sure its front page became a platform for those charging it was Bush's fault.

The beheading of Nick Berg did something that the Times rarely does: It put things into perspective. While likening the abuse of a handful of prisoners in Iraq to a fraternity prank may unduly minimize the disgraceful acts of a few soldiers, the horrific murder of Berg put the prison abuse scandal in its proper context.

Unfortunately, it was not a context that happened to serve the Times' political agenda. While the Times played up the prison abuse scandal, it is not only downplaying Berg's murder by al-Qaida, it is happily playing up attempts to blame the Bush administration for the atrocity.

To the Times, Berg's beheading – the most blatant human-rights abuse in recent memory – was worthy of some front-page real estate, but no where near the square footage accorded the prison abuse scandal. Compare the front-page of the May 6 Sunday Times with the front page of the Times on Wednesday, May 12, and you will see which story the Times thinks is more important.

On Sunday, six photographs depicting the abuse of Iraqi prisoners were shown in a space measuring six inches by seven inches, covering two-thirds of the front-page above the fold. They appeared below the headline, "In Abuse, a Portrayal of Ill-Prepared, Overwhelmed G.I.'s." The message: In typical liberal style, the perpetrators of the prison abuse were not the ones responsible for their actions – they were just the victims.

On Wednesday, the astounding news about Berg's murder may have unavoidably been the lead story – "Iraq Tape Shows The Decapitation of An American" – but its placement was muted compared to the attention given in the Times to the prison abuse scandal.

Rather than receiving a four-column, three-column or even a two-column headline, the Berg story was squeezed into a one-column story, the amount of room usually provided to stories reporting good news on the economy or victories in the war on terror. Contrast that treatment with the front-page the very next day, which sported a lead story under a two-column headline, "Harsh C.I.A. Methods Cited In Top Qaeda Interrogations." (No, that was not story about how well the CIA is doing their job).

Accompanying the story on Berg's execution, the Times printed a photograph of Berg sitting in front of his executors, but the small three-and-one-half-inch by four-inch photo appeared below the fold. On the same front page, the Times thought that a huge five-inch by eight-and-one-half-inch photo of an armored vehicle silhouetted by an Iraqi building ablaze was more deserving of an above-the-fold placement.

On page A11 of that issue, the Times ran a story about the odyssey of Nick Berg, who traveled to Iraq seeking business opportunities, "defying State Department warnings." The story was accompanied by a photograph of Berg's distraught father being comforted by his son David.

The following day, there was good news in Iraq – an Iraqi Counter Terrorist Force, trained by the U.S. in Jordan, successfully aided U.S. Special Forces in an attack that lead to the capture of munitions that could be used for the manufacture of hundreds of roadside bombs. It was another step in the direction of Iraqi self-rule, but you wouldn't find it on the front-page. Rather, the front-page of the Times that day bore the headline, "Family Charges Military Failed Slain Civilian."

Now, our hearts go out to the family of Nick Berg – who must be under an unusual amount of strain, especially given the worldwide attention to the brutality of the murder. But al-Qaida was responsible for the murder, its unusual brutality and the dissemination of its horrible video – not the U.S. government or its military. Berg was warned not to go to Iraq and, while there, was specifically offered a ride out of the country – an offer he refused. Now, rather than putting the family's distress in perspective, the Times runs with the family's anger: "U.S. Officials Failed to Protect American, Family Says."

What's next? Congressional investigations on why the Bush administration didn't force Nick Berg out of Iraq?

How about a story on the reaction in the Muslim world to the vicious execution of Nick Berg?

Instead, we read, "Lawmakers See Iraq Images And Are Shaken by Scenes." How about their reaction – anyone's reaction – to the videotape of Berg execution, particularly the 30 seconds during which his head was being sliced off?

Perspective and context – that's what objective journalism is all about.