I wrote a bit about information planted in reliable sources by intelligence agencies a little while ago. Check this out:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/24/world/asia/24military.html
Why would we treat this any different from a press release by Wal-Mart? It is rather transparently a message whispered in a parrot's ear and intended to influence public opinion.
Fred
2009/9/24 Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net:
I wrote a bit about information planted in reliable sources by intelligence agencies a little while ago. Check this out:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/24/world/asia/24military.html
Why would we treat this any different from a press release by Wal-Mart? It is rather transparently a message whispered in a parrot's ear and intended to influence public opinion.
The NY Times has done exactly what we should do with information from potentially biased sources - they have liberally sprinkled their article with phrases like "senior American military and intelligence officials say". Our articles would have to say "According to the NY Times senior American military and intelligence officials say..." or "The NY Times has reported American officials as saying...".