It only took a few paragraphs in to Salon's critique of the NY Times' handling of revelations - more specifically, the NY Times' exclusion of revelations - in wikileak's #cablegate to begin to wonder about Obama's action, as well, and the meaning of it:
Given the last week's Shirley Sherrod news cycle of pre fact checking trashing to a post fact checked resurrection, I find a little bit of humor in asking some in the traditional media to take an advance look at the most recent Wikileaks documents to help verify the fact that they were real. Ya know.... A little bit of fact checking before anybody runs with it.
Anyways, with the resources they have they can and did serve a purpose here as the Times, the Guardian and others confirmed the likelihood that the docs are the real McCoy, and even using the advance notice to take a moment to dig a story or two out of the Wikileaks documents and spin what they can:
interesting observations, promoted -- cho
A couple of days after the New York Times, according to some, helped the Public Integrity Section (PIS) of the Bush Justice Department shaft Spitzer the stories start going the rounds again about how vulnerable the Times is to a takeover. This one came up this morning.Firesale at the Times. The story has some legs of its own because the hedge fund group that is accumulating shares (Harbinger) now has a bigger position than the NYT’s family owners. The structure of the company prevents them taking over ownership directly but they are now in a position to do a lot of damage to the share price. Judging from the shares’ price performance over the last few years that’s probably not something that will impinge too much on the thinking of the paper’s present ownership.