text:
Skip to comments.Times Reporter Who Resigned Leaves Long Trail of Deception
Posted on 05/10/2003 10:29:40 AM PDT by sarcasm
This article was reported and written by Dan Barry, David Barstow, Jonathan D. Glater, Adam Liptak and Jacques Steinberg. Research support was provided by Alain Delaquérière and Carolyn Wilder.
A staff reporter for The New York Times committed frequent acts of journalistic fraud while covering significant news events in recent months, an investigation by Times journalists has found. The widespread fabrication and plagiarism represent a profound betrayal of trust and a low point in the 152-year history of the newspaper.
The reporter, Jayson Blair, 27, misled readers and Times colleagues with dispatches that purported to be from Maryland, Texas and other states, when often he was far away, in New York. He fabricated comments. He concocted scenes. He stole material from other newspapers and wire services. He selected details from photographs to create the impression he had been somewhere or seen someone, when he had not.
And he used these techniques to write falsely about emotionally charged moments in recent history, from the deadly sniper attacks in suburban Washington to the anguish of families grieving for loved ones killed in Iraq.
In an inquiry focused on correcting the record and explaining how such fraud could have been sustained within the ranks of The New York Times, the Times journalists have so far uncovered new problems in at least 36 of the 73 articles Mr. Blair wrote since he started getting national reporting assignments late last October. In the final months the audacity of the deceptions grew by the week, suggesting the work of a troubled young man veering toward professional self-destruction.
Mr. Blair, who has resigned from the paper, was a reporter at The Times for nearly four years, and he was prolific. Spot checks of the more than 600 articles he wrote before October have found other apparent fabrications, and that inquiry continues. The Times is asking readers to report any additional falsehoods in Mr. Blair's work; the e-mail address is firstname.lastname@example.com.
Every newspaper, like every bank and every police department, trusts its employees to uphold central principles, and the inquiry found that Mr. Blair repeatedly violated the cardinal tenet of journalism, which is simply truth. His tools of deceit were a cellphone and a laptop computer which allowed him to blur his true whereabouts as well as round-the-clock access to databases of news articles from which he stole.
The Times inquiry also establishes that various editors and reporters expressed misgivings about Mr. Blair's reporting skills, maturity and behavior during his five-year journey from raw intern to reporter on national news events. Their warnings centered mostly on his struggle to make fewer errors in his articles.
His mistakes became so routine, his behavior so unprofessional, that by April 2002, Jonathan Landman, the metropolitan editor, dashed off a two-sentence e-mail message to newsroom administrators that read: ``We have to stop Jayson from writing for the Times. Right now.''
After taking a leave for personal problems and being sternly warned, both orally and in writing, that his job was in peril, Mr. Blair improved his performance. By last October, the newspaper's top two editors believing that Mr. Blair had turned his life and work around had guided him to the understaffed national desk, where he was assigned to help cover the Washington sniper case.
By the end of that month, public officials and colleagues were beginning to challenge his reporting. By November, the investigation has found, he was fabricating quotations and scenes, undetected. By March, he was lying in his articles and to his editors about being at a court hearing in Virginia, in a police chief's home in Maryland and in front of a soldier's home in West Virginia. By the end of April another newspaper was raising questions about plagiarism. And by the first of May, his career at The Times was over.
A few days later, Mr. Blair issued a statement that referred to ``personal problems'' and expressed contrition. But during several telephone conversations last week, he declined repeated requests to help the newspaper correct the record or comment on any aspect of his work. He did not respond to messages left on his cellphone, with his family and with his union representative on Friday afternoon.
The reporting for this article included more than 150 interviews with subjects of Mr. Blair's articles and people who worked with him; interviews with Times officials familiar with travel, telephone and other business records; an examination of other records including e-mail messages provided by colleagues trying to correct the record or shed light on Mr. Blair's activities; and a review of reports from competing news organizations.
The investigation suggests several reasons Mr. Blair's deceits went undetected for so long: a failure of communication among senior editors; few complaints from the subjects of his articles; his savviness and his ingenious ways of covering his tracks. Most of all, no one saw his carelessness as a sign that he was capable of systematic fraud.
Mr. Blair was just one of about 375 reporters at The Times; his tenure was brief. But the damage he has done to the newspaper and its employees will not completely fade with next week's editions, or next month's, or next year's.
``It's a huge black eye,'' said Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr., chairman of The New York Times Company and publisher of the newspaper, whose family has owned a controlling interest in The Times for 107 years. ``It's an abrogation of the trust between the newspaper and its readers.''
For all the pain resonating through the Times newsroom, the hurt may be more acute in places like Bethesda, Md., where one of Mr. Blair's fabricated articles described American soldiers injured in combat. The puzzlement is deeper, too, in places like Marmet, W.Va., where a woman named Glenda Nelson learned that Mr. Blair had quoted her in a news article, even though she had never spoken to anyone from The Times.
``The New York Times,'' she said. ``You would expect more out of that.''
The Spree: A Pattern Of Deception
The sniper attacks in suburban Washington dominated the nation's newspapers last October. ``This was a flood the zone story,'' Mr. Roberts, the national editor, recalled, invoking the phrase that has come to embody the paper's aggressive approach to covering major news events under Mr. Raines, its executive editor.
Mr. Raines and Mr. Boyd, the managing editor, quickly increased the size of the team to eight reporters, Mr. Blair among them. ``This guy's hungry,'' Mr. Raines said last week, recalling why he and Mr. Boyd picked Mr. Blair.
Both editors said that the seeming improvement in Mr. Blair's accuracy last summer demonstrated that he was ready to help cover a complicated, high-profile assignment. But they did not tell Mr. Roberts or his deputies about the concerns that had been raised about Mr. Blair's reporting.
``That discussion did not happen,'' Mr. Raines said, adding that he had seen no need for such a discussion because Mr. Blair's performance had improved, and because ``we do not stigmatize people for seeking help.''
Instead, Mr. Boyd recommended Mr. Blair as a reporter who knew his way around Washington suburbs. ``He wasn't sent down to be the first lead writer or the second or third or fourth or fifth writer,'' Mr. Boyd said. ``He was managed and was not thrust into something over his head.''
But Mr. Blair received far less supervision than he had on Mr. Landman's staff, many editors agreed. He was sent into a confusing world of feuding law enforcement agencies, a job that would have tested the skills of the most seasoned reporter. Still, Mr. Blair seemed to throw himself into the fray of reporters fiercely jockeying for leaks and scoops.
``There was a general sense he wanted to impress us,'' recalled Nick Fox, the editor who supervised much of Mr. Blair's sniper coverage.
Impress he did. Just six days after his arrival in Maryland, Mr. Blair landed a front-page exclusive with startling details about the arrest of John Muhammad, one of the two sniper suspects. The article, based entirely on the accounts of five unnamed law enforcement sources, reported that the United States attorney for Maryland, under pressure from the White House, had forced investigators to end their interrogation of Mr. Muhammad perhaps just as he was ready to confess.
It was an important article, and plainly accurate in its central point: that local and federal authorities were feuding over custody of the sniper suspects. But in retrospect, interviews show, the article contained a serious flaw, as well as a factual error.
Two senior law enforcement officials who otherwise bitterly disagree on much of what happened that day are in agreement on this much: Mr. Muhammad was not, as Mr. Blair reported, ``explaining the roots of his anger'' when the interrogation was interrupted. Rather, they said, the discussion touched on minor matters, like arranging for a shower and meal.
The article drew immediate fire. Both the United States attorney, Thomas M. DiBiagio, and a senior Federal Bureau of Investigation official issued statements denying certain details. Similar concerns were raised with senior editors by several veteran reporters in The Times's Washington bureau who cover law enforcement.
Mr. Roberts and Mr. Fox said in interviews last week that the statements would have raised far more serious concerns in their minds had they been aware of Mr. Blair's history of inaccuracy. Both editors also said they had never asked Mr. Blair to identify his sources in the article.
``I can't imagine accepting unnamed sources from him as the basis of a story had we known what was going on,'' Mr. Fox said. ``If somebody had said, `Watch out for this guy,' I would have questioned everything that he did. I can't even imagine being comfortable with going with the story at all, if I had known that the metro editors flat out didn't trust him.''
Mr. Raines and Mr. Boyd, who knew more of Mr. Blair's history, also did not ask him to identify his sources. The two editors said that, given what they knew then, there was no need. There was no inkling, Mr. Raines said, that the newspaper was dealing with ``a pathological pattern of misrepresentation, fabricating and deceiving.''
Mr. Raines said he saw no reason at that point to alert Mr. Roberts to Mr. Blair's earlier troubles. Rather, in keeping with his practice of complimenting what he considered exemplary work, Mr. Raines sent Mr. Blair a note of praise for his ``great shoe-leather reporting.''
Mr. Blair was further rewarded when he was given responsibility for leading the coverage of the sniper case. It was a plum assignment, advancing him toward potentially joining the national staff.
But on Dec. 22, another article about the sniper case by Mr. Blair appeared on the front page. Citing unnamed law enforcement officials once again, his article explained why ``all the evidence'' pointed to Mr. Muhammad's teenage accomplice, Lee Malvo, as the triggerman. And once again his reporting drew strong criticism, this time from a prosecutor who called a news conference to denounce it.
``I don't think that anybody in the investigation is responsible for the leak, because so much of it was dead wrong,'' the prosecutor, Robert Horan Jr., the commonwealth attorney in Fairfax County, Va., said at the news conference.
Mr. Boyd was clearly concerned about Mr. Horan's accusations, colleagues recalled. He repeatedly pressed Mr. Roberts to reach Mr. Horan and have him specify his problems with Mr. Blair's article.
``I went to Jim and said, `Let's check this out thoroughly because Jayson has had problems,''' Mr. Boyd said. Mr. Roberts said that he did not recall being told of the problems.
Again, no editor at The Times pressed Mr. Blair to identify by name his sources on the story. But Mr. Roberts said he had had a more general discussion with Mr. Blair to determine whether his sources were in a position to know what he had reported.
After repeated efforts, Mr. Roberts reached Mr. Horan. ``It was kind of a Mexican standoff,'' Mr. Horan recalled. ``I was not going to tell him what was true and what was not true. I detected in him a real concern that they had published something incorrect.''
``I don't know today whether Blair just had a bad source,'' he continued. ``It was equally probable at the time that he was just sitting there writing fiction.''
Mr. Roberts, meanwhile, said that Mr. Horan complained only about leaks, and never raised the possibility that Mr. Blair was fabricating details.
In the end, Mr. Raines said last week, the paper handled the criticisms of both articles appropriately. ``I'm confident we went through the proper journalistic steps,'' he said.
It was not until January, Mr. Roberts recalled, that he was warned about Mr. Blair's record of inaccuracy and erratic behavior. He said Mr. Landman quietly told him that Mr. Blair was prone to error and needed to be watched. Mr. Roberts added that he did not pass the warning on to his deputies. ``It got socked in the back of my head,'' he said.
By then, however, the national editors had already formed their own assessments of Mr. Blair's work. They said they considered him a sloppy writer who was often difficult to track down and at times even elusive about his whereabouts.
Close scrutiny of his travel expenses would have revealed other signs that Mr. Blair was not where his editors thought he was, and, even more alarming, that he was perhaps concocting law enforcement sources. But at the time his expense records, when provided, were being quickly reviewed by an administrative assistant; editors did not examine them.
On an expense report filed in January, for example, he indicated that he had bought blankets at a Marshall's department store in Washington; the receipt showed that the purchase was made at a Marshall's in Brooklyn. He also reported a purchase at a Starbuck's in Washington; again, the receipt showed that it was in Brooklyn. On both days, he was supposedly writing articles from Washington.
Mr. Blair also reported that he dined with a law enforcement official at a Tutta Pasta restaurant in Washington on the day he wrote an article from there. As the receipt makes clear, this Tutta Pasta is in Brooklyn. Mr. Blair said that he dined with the same official at Penang, another New York City restaurant that Mr. Blair placed in Washington on his expense reports.
Reached this week, the official said that he had never dined with Mr. Blair, and in fact was in Florida with his wife on one of the dates.
According to cellphone records, computer logs and other records recently described by New York Times administrators, Mr. Blair had by this point developed a pattern of pretending to cover events in the Mid-Atlantic region when in fact he was spending most of his time in New York.
In e-mail messages to colleagues, for example, he conveyed the impression of a travel-weary national correspondent who spent far too much time in La Guardia Airport terminals. Conversely, colleagues marveled at his productivity, at his seemingly indefatigable constitution. ``Man, you really get around,'' one fellow reporter wrote Mr. Blair in an e-mail message.
Mr. Raines took note, too, especially after Mr. Blair's tale from Hunt Valley. By April, Mr. Raines recalled, senior editors were discussing whether Mr. Blair should be considered for a permanent slot on the national reporting staff.
``My feeling was, here was a guy who had been working hard and getting into the paper on significant stories,'' Mr. Raines said. The plan, he said, was for Mr. Roberts to give Mr. Blair a two- or three-month tryout in the Mid-Atlantic bureau to see if he could do the job.
Mr. Roberts said that he resisted the idea, and told Mr. Boyd he had misgivings about Mr. Blair. ``He works the way he lives - sloppily,'' he recalled telling Mr. Boyd, who said last week he had agreed that Mr. Blair was not the best candidate for the job.
But with his staff stretched thin to supply reporters for Iraqi war coverage and elsewhere, Mr. Roberts had little choice but to press Mr. Blair into duty on the home front.
After the Hunt Valley article in late March, Mr. Blair pulled details out of thin air in his coverage of one of the biggest stories to come from the war, the capture and rescue of Pfc. Jessica D. Lynch.
In an article on March 27 that carried a dateline from Palestine, W.Va., Mr. Blair wrote that Private Lynch's father, Gregory Lynch Sr., ``choked up as he stood on his porch here overlooking the tobacco fields and cattle pastures.'' The porch overlooks no such thing.
He also wrote that Private Lynch's family had a long history of military service; it does not, family members said. He wrote that their home was on a hilltop; it is in a valley. And he wrote that Ms. Lynch's brother was in the West Virginia National Guard; he is in the Army.
The article astonished the Lynch family, said Brandi Lynch, Jessica's sister. ``We were joking about the tobacco fields and the cattle.'' Asked why neither she nor anyone else in the family called to complain about the many errors, she said, ``We just figured it was going to be a one-time thing.''
It now appears that Mr. Blair may never have gone to West Virginia, from where he claimed to have filed five articles about the Lynch family. E-mail messages and cellphone records suggest that during much of that time he was in New York. Not a single member of the Lynch family remembers speaking to Mr. Blair.
Between the first coverage of the sniper attacks in late October and late April, Mr. Blair filed articles claiming to be from 20 cities in six states. Yet during those five months, he did not submit a single receipt for a hotel room, rental car or airplane ticket, officials at The Times said.
Mr. Blair did not have a company credit card - the reasons are unclear - and had been forced to rely on Mr. Roberts's credit card to pay bills from his first weeks on the sniper story. His own credit cards, he had told a Times administrator, were beyond their credit limit. The only expense he filed with regularity was for his cellphone, that indispensable tool of his dual existence.
``To have a national reporter who is working in a traveling capacity for the paper and not file expenses for those trips for a four-month period is certainly in hindsight something that should attract our attention,'' Mr. Boyd said. But the fact that it did not, he and others said, is an indication of just how thoroughly the newspaper relies on trust.
On April 29, toward the end of his remarkable run of deceit, Mr. Blair was summoned to the newsroom to answer accusations of plagiarism lodged by The San Antonio Express-News. The concerns centered on an article that he claimed to have written from Los Fresnos, Tex., about the anguish of a missing soldier's mother.
In a series of tense meetings over two days, Mr. Roberts repeatedly pressed Mr. Blair for evidence that he had indeed interviewed the mother. Sitting in Mr. Roberts's small office, the reporter produced pages of handwritten notes to allay his editor's increasing concern.
Mr. Roberts needed more - ``You've got to come clean with us,'' he said - and zeroed in on that house in Texas. He asked Mr. Blair to describe precisely what he had seen.
Mr. Blair did not hesitate. He told Mr. Roberts of the reddish roof on the white stucco house, of the red Jeep in the driveway, of the roses blooming in the yard. Mr. Roberts later inspected unpublished photographs of the mother's house, which matched Mr. Blair's descriptions in every detail.
It was not until Mr. Blair's deceptions were uncovered that Mr. Roberts learned how the reporter could have deceived him yet again: by gaining access to the newspaper's computerized photo archives.
What haunts Mr. Roberts now, he says, is one particular moment when editor and reporter were facing each other in a showdown over the core aim of their profession: truth.
``Look me in the eye and tell me you did what you say you did,'' Mr. Roberts demanded. Mr. Blair returned his gaze and said he had.
The Lessons: When Wrong, 'Get Right'
The New York Times continues as before. Every morning, stacks of The Times are piled at newsstands throughout the city; every morning, newspaper carriers toss plastic bags containing that day's issue onto the lawns of readers from Oregon to Maine. What remains unclear is how long those copies will carry the dust from the public collapse of a young journalist's career.
Mr. Blair is no longer welcome in the newsroom he so often seemed unable to leave. Many of his friends express anger at him for his betrayal, and at The Times for not heeding signs of his self-destructive nature. Others wonder what comes next for him; Thomas Kunkel, dean of the journalism program at the University of Maryland, gently suggested that the former student might return to earn that college degree.
But Mr. Blair harmed more than himself. Although the deceit of one Times reporter does not impugn the work of 375 others, experts and teachers of journalism say that The Times must repair the damage done to the public trust.
``To the best of my knowledge, there has never been anything like this at The New York Times,'' said Alex S. Jones, a former Times reporter and the co-author of ``The Trust: The Private and Powerful Family Behind The New York Times'' (Little Brown, 1999). He added: ``There has never been a systematic effort to lie and cheat as a reporter at The New York Times comparable to what Jayson Blair seems to have done.''
Mr. Jones suggested that the newspaper might conduct random checks of the veracity of news articles after publication. But Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, questioned how much a newspaper can guard against willful fraud by deceitful reporters.
``It's difficult to catch someone who is deliberately trying to deceive you,'' Mr. Rosenstiel said. ``There are risks if you create a system that is so suspicious of reporters in a newsroom that it can interfere with the relationship of creativity that you need in a newsroom - of the trust between reporters and editors.''
Still, in the midst of covering a succession of major news events, from serial killings and catastrophes to the outbreak of war, something clearly broke down in the Times newsroom. It appears to have been communication - the very purpose of the newspaper itself.
Some reporters and administrators did not tell editors about Mr. Blair's erratic behavior. Editors did not seek or heed the warnings of other editors about his reporting. Five years' worth of information about Mr. Blair was available in one building, yet no one put it together to determine whether he should be put under intense pressure and assigned to cover high-profile national events.
``Maybe this crystallizes a little that we can find better ways to build lines of communication across what is, to be fair, a massive newsroom,'' said Mr. Sulzberger, the publisher.
But Mr. Sulzberger emphasized that as The New York Times continues to examine how its employees and readers were betrayed, there will be no newsroom search for scapegoats. ``The person who did this is Jayson Blair,'' he said. ``Let's not begin to demonize our executives - either the desk editors or the executive editor or, dare I say, the publisher.''
Mr. Raines, who referred to the Blair episode as a ``terrible mistake,'' said that in addition to correcting the record so badly corrupted by Mr. Blair, he planned to assign a task force of newsroom employees to identify lessons for the newspaper. He repeatedly quoted a lesson he said he learned long ago from A.M. Rosenthal, a former executive editor.
``When you're wrong in this profession, there is only one thing to do,'' he said. ``And that is get right as fast as you can.''
For now, the atmosphere of a disliked relative's protracted wake pervades the newsroom. Employees accept the condolences of callers. They discuss what they might have done differently. They find comfort in gallows humor. And, of course, they talk endlessly about how Jayson could have done this.
Readers with information about other articles by Jayson Blair that may be false wholly or in part are asked to e-mail The Times: email@example.com.
I don't think so. Anthony Lewis' comment that "mass explusions are the only way to start on their (the Khymer Rouge's) vision of a new society" was lower. Sydney Schanberg calling predictions of mass executions under Pol Pot "tendentious" was lower. Herbert Matthew's shilling for Castro was lower. Walter Duranty hiding the murder of over 6 million people was lower.
Two Times reporters killed themselves last year. One jumped out of a 7th floor window at the paper's Manhattan headquarters. Wonder what is going on we don't know.
[excerpt, an unofficial transcript of the audio file]
Mr. Raines: I do want to make a point to your readers who are not a part of the journalism community, that the processes of editing on a paper like the Times and other large papers in this country is a multi-layered process; and its designed to find the unintentional or accidental errors in the copy of people who are working on an atmosphere of mutual trust and integrity, and holding a share stake on the strict set of journalistic values that we observe here.
This system is not set up to catch someone who sets out to lie, and to use every means at his or her disposal to put false information into the paper.
Mr. Smith I understand the distinction. What Im curious about is, since he had a great number of corrections published in the paper over his tenure; and since publicly, the prosecutor Bob Horan and others raised questions about his reporting, wasnt there a red flag to you earlier than last week?
Mr. Raines: The corrections were a red flag. I dont want to get into a debate with Mr. Horan whose account there has some parts out of it that might be responded to. But communicating with our readers about our efforts to set the record straight.
We manage corrections closely; as Jack Schaefer (sp?) and other media commentators have pointed out, on a serious newspaper you will have a higher number of corrections because those papers are aggressive about finding out mistakes, tracking them down.
In the case of this young man, he was working under the direct supervision as an intern, under two of our most rigorous training editors. He had over the space of three years, a correction rate of 5%. From my point of view, the acceptable correction rate is zero, but 5% on a paper like this is not an automatic sign of incompetence. Indeed we have a number of reporters who run in that range, over time, who are without a doubt seasoned professionals.
Because we are aggressive about correcting our errors does not mean we are reckless about letting them into the paper.
Ive been back over this young mans personnel record for the entire time he was here. After coming onto the staff in 2001, he went into a period where his error rate shot up to 16% in an eight-month period, . . .
Mr. Smith You might explain how that rate works. Thats 16 errors about of 100 stories?
Mr. Raines I should have said corrections, Terry. 16 corrections. In other words, for every 100 stories, 16 of them had to have something corrected and run in the paper. Sometimes this might be an error or correction that is not due to reporters fault, that is, the police released the incorrect spelling of a name, we come back and correct it; it shows up in that reporters computer tally.
"Sources say..." Yeah, the sources floating around in the NY Times reporters' imaginations. Believe me, Blair isn't the only reporter there making up sources. It is a common NY Times practice.
Much has been made of the fact that, since hiring Blair in 1998, the Times has run 50 corrections on his stories. Raines, in fact, has said that the young reporter was admonished in a performance report that he had committed an excessive number of mistakes. A number of publications, including this one, have conducted computer searches to see how Blair's error rate compared to that of his colleagues. The Weekly Standard, for example, compares Blair's record to that of senior Times correspondents R.W. Apple and Adam Clymer over the same period of time. Blair had an error rate of 6.9%, less than half Apple's rate of 14% (46 corrections on 327 stories) and almost a third lower than Clymer's rate of 9% (36 corrections on 400 stories). (Since January 2002, this columnist has had an error rate of about 10%, 12 mistakes in 116 stories and columns.)
In the history of Journalism, has there ever been a WORSE editor than Howell Raines? His entire tenure has been fouled by the stench of bias and just general all-around CRAPPY journalism. Pinch won't fire Raines because of the weird mesmerizing hold Raines has over Pinch.
Hey, NYT! Yoohoo! You still haven't 'fessed up about your boy Walter Duranty and all his years of lying and Soviet propaganda that appeared in your rag. Because of that, nobody in his right mind takes the Pulitzer seriously anymore.
``The New York Times,'' she said. ``You would expect more out of that.''
And that's what is so funny about this chicanery. Anyone with two neurons
to rub together knows that the reporting side on the NYT is so poisoned by
the editorial vision of what the news ought to be rather than what it is, nothing the
NYT prints can be read with any expectation of truth, including the logo with
its backwards 'Y.'
The big questions is: Which kind of corrections?
If the correction is simply an update on a spelling error caused by faulty police records, the correction is inconsequential.
On the other hand, if the correction involves made up quotes and other fabrications, then the correction is a sign of incompetence and dishonesty.
The NY Times has a lousy system if it cannot distinguish between Blairs correction record and Clymers correction record.
Well, they no longer recall them to the Kremlin for show trials and banishment to the Gulag, so there must be some other reason. Perhaps in a rare unguarded moment, they realized they had spent their entire professional lives in the service of evil.
Howell Raines should absolutely be fired.
I've read the NYT every morning since I was 13 (I obviously didn't absorb much from the editorial page).
The Times used to be an indispensible news source. The Times printed stuff that didn't exist anywhere else. It was our first, and our only, newspaper of record.
Raines has ruined a national institution. And it wasn't his to ruin, to begin with.
Now you got me thinking,
Was Blair Boyd's Toy?
Remember, back then the major newspaper reporters REFUSED to investigate the Vince Foster case because they just accepted what the government told them and then stopped any independent investigation. And Peter Jennings was the one who displayed that PHONY photo of Foster holding a gun on ABC World News Tonight while acting like that should put a stop to the controversy.
Again, WHO were the major reporters on the Vince Foster case?
For instance, after the Post was forced to take back a February front-page story on the sniper case, Blair sent along an e-mail with the following subject line: "oooooooppppps." The missive proceeded to chide the Post's reporting and accused the paper of "stretching."
It seems that the Washington Post does not want to be left behind in the fabrication department... and Blair had a lot chutzpah
And he was castigated by the lamestream reporters as some sort of kook. Actually what Ambrose Evans-Pritchard did was FOOTWORK, something the other reporters REFUSED to do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.


text:
What's Included
About This Organizer
Welcome to the Aquila Morong Studio.
Deborah Aquila and Donna Morong have opened a studio in the heart of Hollywood for the serious professional actor to hone their craft for film and TV using techniques developed by Stella Adler and Sanford Meisner.
"We are actors who have been trained by legendary teachers-Stella Adler and Bill Esper. We utilized our invaluable training to begin our careers as teachers, then as casting directors, and now with our own studio as a permanent home, we have returned to teaching again to pass along our tools and knowledge to you. As casting directors, we have literally seen hundreds of thousands of actors' work over the course of our careers that have spanned three decades. Over that time, we have pinpointed the mistakes and triumphs that make a successful actor. We incorporate ALL of our experience in the training we offer to make you achieve EXCELLENCE! We work to shape our actors into exemplary artists, while giving them the tools they can use in real world situations, whether it be an audition room or on-set. Studying with Aquila Morong Studio is not just an eye-opening and enlightening experience, but an experience that provides you with tools you can use to realize your dreams. It's not about tricks- It's about CRAFT."
-Deborah Aquila & Donna Morong
Organizer Info
Aquila Morong

subset: commoncrawl


text:
" Brand: Weight Watchers / Type: Bathroom Scales "
* Prices may differ from that shown
I have used these scales for a while now and they have always been really reliable. They've always been accurate and have the added advantage of being sleek so can be discretely tucked away somewhere until they're needed. The screen/numbers showing weight are large and clear. Very easy to use and feature to switch between stone or kg is simple. Definitely a brilliant buy that will help anyone trying to lose weight or anyone simply keeping an eye on their weight.
As many of you will know, I have been following the Weight Watchers' plan for around four months now and am currently just four pounds short of losing two stone. There is no way that I could have lost all this weight alone, without the help of Weight Watchers. The Weight Watcher's gadgets have been invaluable in helping me on my weight loss journey; one of which gadgets is this Weight Watchers' scales which I bought from my meeting for £29.95. It's more than I would normally spend on a scales, but I think I was so 'swept up in the moment' that I decided to purchase it, and am pleased I am.
The scales are made of glass; to begin with I was a bit scared to go on them in case they broke - although don't worry they hold up to 28 stones in weight which is good as it is more than the average 'normal' scales which only go up to 19 stones. The scales are very strong and have a good 'grip' on the bottom, so that the scales stay put when you step on them.
Using the scales is very easy - obviously, make sure that the scales are on a flat surface then simply hop on and wait (no pun intended!) for the correct digit to appear. You can weigh yourself in either stones and pounds or kilograms. I always weigh myself in stones and pounds, as one I find that it is easier to work out, and two it is the same method used in my Weight Watchers' meetings. It's probably easier to weigh in stones as if you do it with pounds then you have to work out how many stones and pounds it is.
The scales has a good display panel; it's very clear and easy to see and I find that I am not squinting like I am with 'normal' scales. There is also a feature on the scale where you can put in your age, height etc and then it records your weight for you. This is helpful if you are on a weight loss journey as you can see if you have stayed the same, lost weight or put on weight without having to keep a record yourself.
I previously had a 'normal' scales; what I would describe as one which the 'finger waves over the notches' as opposed to being a digital one like this. One thing which I like about this scales is that it tells me exactly how many pounds I am and so is similar to the one which the use in our Weight Watchers' meeting - this means that I can keep an eye on what I weigh during the week and in-between my Weight Watchers' meetings, as opposed to my old scales where I had to guess what my weight was as it wasn't easy to see which exact notch the finger was pointing at.
I would definitely recommend these scales - I find them to be very accurate. They are a great tool to have to make sure I am keeping on track in-between my Weight Watcher meetings. I do think that these scales are a bit pricey though, and so you can probably find a scale like this cheaper, or even cheaper on Amazon than it is in meetings.
Thanks for reading!
January 2014
Seeing as my scales have been doing over time this week I thought I'd review them as I'm sure I'm not alone to having eaten too much over the Xmas and new year session. I've had some of these Weight Watchers scales for about 4 years now. They were on offer in Tesco's and seeing as about the third time I went shopping they still had some left on offer they jumped into my trolley. I think they were originally £29.99 if I remember rightly. Looking online now they are £19.99 in Tesco or about £25 with other online stores.
They were n a white box with the Weight watchers logo on them, I just wanted the scales as they look nice and modern, I'm not doing Weight Watchers. The older style scales I found difficult to use as would have to bend trying to read the dial and then it would move as I wasn't stood still etc. The reading on these is very clear and easy to see.
I was very careful with these at first and after each use they'd go back into the box but nowadays they remain on my toilet floor for regular use. I do remember thinking twice before buying them after they jumped into my trolley about the fact I would be standing on a piece of glass to weigh myself but I assure you they hold a lot of weight and even my then 24 stone father had tried them out.
The main glass panel is on four plastic stoppers and the figures reading panel, these keep the sales flat on the ground for use.
The control button for these is on the base and you can switch them to weigh in stones /pounds or in kilo /grams. I used to just use stones but my partner only uses kilos so I tend to keep them on that and have got used to that now. When you are ready to weigh yourself you need to tap the top of scales with your foot to bring them to life as when they go unused for approx 15 seconds they turn themselves off. When you stand on them you can see the figures climb up then take a few seconds to settle on the exact number and once they have decided if you've lost that extra kilo or not they will flash with the final weight. Repeat this method 2 or 3 times to convince yourself that you did read them correctly and they aren't lying lol.
I would recommend these and they are lasting well. They take the flat kind of batteries and I've only recently changed them for the first time since having them.
When I started doing Weight Watchers a few months ago I decided to treat myself to a decent pair of scales so that I could keep a track of how I was doing. As luck would have it my daughter had sold some text books on Amazon so she used some of her vouchers to buy these Weight Watchers Precision scales for me. They were £20 on Amazon at the time and included an offer where you save £32.95 when you join Weight Watchers online so a really good deal in my opinion!
The scales themselves come securely packaged in a box with clear instructions on how to set them up. They are very stylish looking with a thick glass top and brushed metal feet. The digital display is large and easy to read. To begin, you simply program in your personal details, height, gender, age etc. and these are stored in the memory to be recalled each time you weigh. The scales weigh in quarter pound increments and are extremely accurate. They go up to a maximum weight of just over 28 stones so should be suitable for most people. No matter where I put them, and on what type of surface the readings are always the same. Gone are the days of those dodgy rubber topped scales with a dial so you could adjust them back to 0 each time!
Overall this is a useful tool for managing weight loss and although I don't always like what they say, I at least know that they are correct.
I do not follow weight watchers and I am only familiar with the brand from seeing it advertised on television and listening to my friends who use their diet plans. I like to have bathroom scales though as it it important to know when those extra cakes and buns are catching up on me! Both my partner and I weigh ourselves and like to know if our weight is changing or fluctuating. I do not do this on a regular basis but I keep them out by the sink and every now and then to fill those boring minutes of brushing my teeth I will hop on and see how my weight is doing. When my last scales completely gave up the ghost, I saw these on offer and I thought I would give them a go. Weight watchers are a reputable brand name and specialise in losing weight so I would imagine that there scales are accurate and reliable. However I was wrong and I have been really disappointed with the scales.
==Price and availability==
The scales cost £14.99 and are available online or in stores. I bought mine from Costco who were selling them for £8.99. This is a good price for scales but I would not be recommending them despite the price.
The scales are a mixture of silver metal and glass. They are quite heavy really and I think this is down to the glass. The scales are set on four level feet and at the top of the glass plate is a large LCD strip that is easy to read and follow. The scales come with a lithium battery which is supposed to be long life last you for a long time.
The scales will measure in kg or stone and this is altered by a small switch underneath. The scales measure in really small exact figures, I work in metrics so in terms of measuring my weight this means it will be accurate down to 100g.
To work the scales, you need to lay them on a flat surface that is not carpeted and step on them once and step off. This sparks up the LCD and it will flash with two dashes when it is ready to go. Once ready, step on and stand still the LCD display with display the weight. Once you have finished step off and the scales go back to sleep mode.
==My experiences==
My partner and I have had a mixed impression with the scales. I weigh myself quite randomly and have found not much changes from week to week. If I was taking dieting seriously I would make an effort to weigh myself at the same time each week as this will help get the best possible results. After my boyfriend complained scales were inaccurate I conducted a few tests. I thought that as my partner had been weighing himself at different times of the day this could account for some of the discrepancies he found. For example one day he said he weighed himself at 7am and then at 11am and there was 4 lbs difference. We sat for 10 minutes both of us getting on and off the scales and we did actually get different readings. We moved the scales into the kitchen where we have laminate and the scales were working much better and completely accurate so it turns out that the scales do not like the Lino of my bathroom! Boo! Now we have to take the scales downstairs when we want to use them. I have never experienced a problem such as this before and my old scales worked fine on the lino.
There is no where else to use them upstairs as it is either Lino or carpet so the scales have been thrown in a cupboard and if we want to use them we take them downstairs. I feel let down by this product, they should not be that sensitive. Scales in the home need to be accurate but there is no need for super sensitivity. I would not recommend them unfortunately.


text:
There is a wonderful and important movie that will be playing in theaters near you for one week beginning Friday, April 19. The name of the movie is "Girl Rising" (girlrising.com). It is about nine girls in nine countries telling stories (with the help of women writers from their own countries with whom they were paired) of their own lives, which is to say lives of tragedy and hopelessness rescued by courage and determination — and school.
You cannot make a better investment in the developing world than educating a girl. It is that simple. If you don't understand this, or if you do and you want to feel that there is more to the world than bombs exploding and ricin in envelopes and petty politicians playing parliamentary games, go to your local theater and let them touch your heart.
"I feel as though I have power. ... I can do anything. And I have important things to do." — Suma, Nepal
This has been a week when I didn't feel that way.
I remember, years ago, attending a talk by Mavis Leno, who was way ahead of the curve on how women were being treated by the Taliban. It must have been the late '90s, and she was trying to get the world to focus on the oppression of Afghan girls and women and how you could and should judge a country based on how it treats its women.
And its girls. She was right. Sadly, it took us a while to figure that out.
Kayce F. Jennings, senior producer of The Documentary Group (which she founded with her late husband, ABC anchor Peter Jennings), gets it. She produced the movie, believed in it and has been reaching out to old friends like me to get the message out. Peter would be so proud. This is so right — and it's especially so right now.
Two of the nine girls in the movie do not themselves portray their life stories. Too dangerous. That is the world. There is no escaping it. But their eyes — you can see their eyes — burn with hope.
You can't help but feel lucky in every way watching an orphaned girl picking plastic bags from the trash and dreaming not of Hollywood or stardom or of a prince on a white horse, but of a crisp white shirt and a school jumper and shelves full of books.
But there is a moment, too, when you may start thinking: When did I give up believing the world is a place I can change? When did I stop hoping and start hiding? I feel like that, too often, watching videos like those from this week. The only time I do not regret the march of time — the wrinkles on my face, the arthritis in my hands — is when I think of the monumental challenges my children and yours will face as they try to make their way, peacefully and safely, in this dangerous and often evil world.
There has got to be a better answer than squinting to try to figure out the nationalities of the two Boston bombing suspects whose pictures have just been released so we can focus on whom to hate right now or figure out who could hate us that much.
Choose life, we say. Choose hope. Nine girls are rising at your local theater. Millions more could be following them. If they have the courage and the hope, so should we.
Susan Estrich is a lawyer, professor, author and political commentator for Fox News.


text:
AAR said 10 of the 20 carload commodity groups it tracks posted increases during the week, including petroleum products, up 55.7%, farm products excluding grain, up 26.5%, and lumber and wood products, up 20.8%. Declining commodities included metallic ores, down 17.5%, and waste and nonferrous scrap, down 14.5%. Coal fell 6.7% for the week compared with one year ago.
By contrast, Canadian freight carload volume for the week was up 3.9% compared with the same week last year, and Canadian intermodal volume also rose, up 3.2%. Mexican freight carload volume edged down 0.1%, while Mexican intermodal advanced 32.6% for the week compared with a year ago.
Combined North American freight carload volume for the first 34 weeks of 2012 on 13 reporting U.S., Canadian, and Mexican railroads was down 1.3% compared with the same point last year, while combined intermodal was up 4.6% compared with the comparable period in 2011.


text:
Time for more blind optimism.
You all think that Terrence Ross = Mo-pete? Or
A hybrid of J-Rich and Tony Allen is what I see Terrence Ross as.
All this from his clips from college and latest las Vegas games.
Or is he going to be coming off the bench forever?
Never amount to nutin?
Your thoughts


text:
As Business-Focused Startups Rise, New Incubators Spring Up
With a glut of consumer startups struggling to raise funding, startups that serve businesses are becoming fashionable in Silicon Valley again because they have a proven way to make money.
Now new incubators are emerging to help those startups, on the theory that startups with business customers need help that less specialized incubators can't provide.
The latest one, Plug and Play Tech Center in Sunnyvale, Calif., is planning a new business-to-business accelerator for this spring.


text:
Skip to Content
December 2, 2015
Learn how to mute notifications, change your default Web browser, customize the Quick Settings tray, and more on Android Marshmallow. Read more
November 17, 2015
If you want to be efficient as possible, it pays to learn some basic keyboard shortcuts. Read more
In courses that embrace the Learning Paradigm, the instructor's role is to guide students in the right direction rather than simply delivering the content. And with the wealth of resources available online, the instructor is no longer the only source of knowledge. Read more
November 12, 2015
Students are coming back to campus armed with thousands of devices. How do they protect them and their identities? Read more
In an interview with Online Classroom, Dr. Laurie Grosik suggests ways to support online students without creating an undue burden on the instructor. Read more
IT Help Center(818) 677-1400
Faculty Technology Center(818) 677-3443
Classroom Help(818) 677-1500
Information Technology
© California State University, Northridge
18111 Nordhoff Street, Northridge, CA 91330
Phone: (818) 677-1200
Contact Us
Page Feedback
Emergency Information
University Policies & Procedures
Terms and Conditions for Use
Privacy Policy
Document Reader
California State University


text:
Definition of dwarfing
p. pr. & vb. n. - of Dwarf 2
The word "dwarfing" uses 8 letters: A D F G I N R W.
No direct anagrams for dwarfing found in this word list.
Adding one letter to dwarfing does not form any other word in this word list.Words within dwarfing not shown as it has more than seven letters.
List all words starting with dwarfing, words containing dwarfing or words ending with dwarfing
All words formed from dwarfing by changing one letter
Other words with the same letter pairs: dw wa ar rf fi in ng
Browse words starting with dwarfing by next letter
Previous word in list: dwarfest
Next word in list: dwarfish
Some random words: obscene fobs lo tsade kelep aepyornis anas
This is not a dictionary, it's a word game wordfinder.
- Help and FAQ - Examples - Home
Privacy and Cookies Policy - Share - © Copyright 2004-2017 Morewords.com - 10.091mS


text:
- Vitamin Guide
- Health Conditions
- Health Centers
- Diet & Weight Loss
- Herbal Remedies
- Current News
- Food Guide
- Recipes
In the eight-week trial, 189 overweight and obese people took a placebo or one of nine weight-loss supplements according to the manufacturer's directions, including L-carnitine, polyglucosamine (chitosan), cabbage powder, guaraná seed powder, bean extract, konjac extract (glucomannan), fiber pills, sodium alginate formulations, or "selected plant extracts."
At the end of the study, the people taking weight-loss supplements lost two to four pounds and the people taking placebo lost two to two and half pounds, a difference that wasn't statistically significant. "We found that not a single product was any more effective than placebo pills in producing weight loss, regardless of how it claims to work," said lead study author Thomas Ellrott, head of the Institute for Nutrition and Psychology at the University of Göttingen Medical School, Germany, in a news release.
Given the demand for interventions and the vast industry built around weight loss, it is important that researchers continue to explore the effects of such supplements. This study raises many questions that will be interesting to understand if the findings are accepted for publication, including details on what the "selected plant extracts" were, and why cabbage powder (and possibly others, depending on what the "selected plant extracts" are) was included when it doesn't appear to be marketed specifically for weight loss, at least in the US.
We know from research on using supplements to manage a wide range of health conditions, intake amounts and use in combination with other supplements and interventions (such as exercise and dietary changes) can have a measurable impact on a supplement's effects. So it will be interesting to see whether the manufacturer's recommendations followed in this research represents optimal usage.
In the US, weight-loss supplements are regulated as food by the Food and Drug Administration, guided by the "Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act." DSHEA guidelines restrict manufacturers from making health claims other than approved "structure-function" claims (for example, calcium supports bone health). Because of this regulation, even when research does exist that might be the basis for more effective usage, manufacturers are not allowed to print information on packaging, which means that following "manufacturer's instructions" in most supplement use is unlikely to be optimal. It is unclear whether Germany has similar packaging guidelines.
It should come as no surprise that the only sure way to lose weight and keep it off is to change the way you eat and to exercise more. Claims that any supplement, medicine, or any other product can help you lose weight without doing these things should be met with a healthy dose of skepticism.
If diet and exercise alone haven't helped you lose weight and you're thinking about taking a supplement, consult an unbiased source before you buy to see what research has said so far and to get realistic expectations of how the mechanisms claimed by manufacturers might support your goals. For example, the Healthnotes® database has gathered this science about some of the products that were reviewed in the study: many have been shown to have conflicting results. Some have shown promise if a specific amount is taken but not with a lesser amount, or if used in conjunction with a diet and exercise program.
While we wait for more details to emerge from the German study, we can focus on what we do know about weight loss: It isn't going to happen without some work—lasting results rely on meaningful lifestyle changes. The recipe for weight loss is as easy as (not eating) pie: Eat Less + Exercise More = Weight Loss for Life
(Proceedings of the International Congress on Obesity 2010)
Copyright © 2018 Healthnotes, Inc. All rights reserved. www.healthnotes.com


text:
Pittsfield Parade to step off at 10 a.m.; TV broadcast limited this year
PITTSFIELD -- The Pittsfield Fourth of July Parade will feature the usual marching bands, floats and helium balloons, but residents in north and south Berkshire County that want to watch it live this year will have to come in person -- or stream it on the Web.
Time Warner Cable has pulled the plug on the simulcast services that allowed subscribers outside the Pittsfield area to watch the festivities in real time, according to PCTV parade producer Matt Tucker. Subscribers in Pittsfield, Richmond and Dalton aren't affected by the blackout.
The PCTV broadcast begins at 9:30 a.m. with the pre-parade show, with the first marching units led by area veterans groups stepping off at 10 a.m. from the intersection of South and East/West Housatonic streets. The parade will continue along South Street directly onto North Street by Park Square, turn left onto Wahconah Street before wrapping up at Wahconah Park.
Approximately 60,000 spectators lined the route each of the past two years, officials estimate, many in folding chairs or on blankets, three or more rows deep.
The 2014 parade lineup includes 19 marching bands and 20 floats in keeping with the theme "Made in America." Weather permitting, the Mummers will highlight the musical talent, said Peter Marchetti, president of the Pittsfield Parade Committee, although the Boston Crusaders Drum and Bugle Corps had to back out due to logistical issues. Kermit the Frog and the American Eagle are among the five character helium balloons that will glide through the air along the parade route.
Longtime health care volunteer and head of the Pittsfield Ethnic Fair, Mario DeMartino is the parade grand marshal The late Joanne Hayes, who died last fall, was chosen as the honorary grand marshal for her years of service on the Parade Committee.
Since 2010, Pittsfield Community Television has been able to feed its transmission of the two-hour live parade coverage to a total of nine communities through Community Television for the Southern Berkshires and Northern Berkshire Community Television Corp.
Time Warner has discontinued that service, but Tucker said a copy of the broadcast will be made available to CTSB and NBCTC for rebroadcast.
"We will post it as soon as possible so they can download it," he said.
As for fundraising, the committee has received $54,000 in donations, two-thirds of the $85,000 goal, according to Marchetti.
"We'll have enough to cover our expenses as we have dipped into our reserves," he said. "Additional funds raised will be used toward next years parade."
Some of those funds -- about $500 -- will pay for PCTV to live stream the broadcast via its website, www.pittsfieldtv.org. Marchetti said the web broadcast was planned independent of any potential simulcast through Time Warner.
Last minute fundraising efforts include Liam Geddes, a celebrated singer songwriter from Ballina in County Mayo, Ireland, Pittsfield's sister city, performing a benefit concert Thursday night at Spice Dragon on North Street.
In 2012, Geddes appeared on the "The Voice of Ireland," the Irish edition of the international TV franchise "The Voice," the highly acclaimed television talent competition.
Prior to the start of the parade, a bucket brigade of volunteers will pass red, white and blue containers among the tens of thousands of people lining the parade route, hoping they contribute what cash they can to help offset the parade expenses.
For more parade information or to donate online, go to pittsfieldparade.com or call at (413) 447-7763.
To reach Dick Lindsay:
or (413) 496-6233
If you'd like to leave a comment (or a tip or a question) about this story with the editors, please email us. We also welcome letters to the editor for publication; you can do that by filling out our letters form and submitting it to the newsroom.


text:
Five bottles of beer, along with 168 bottles of champagne, were pulled from a submerged schooner that experts believe sank in the 1840s.
Aland authorities say Finnish scientists studied the beer and devised a formula for a recreation that the local Stallhagen brewery will produce.
Stallhagen CEO Jan Wennstrom said in a statement Thursday that he hopes the vintage beer will help the company reach new markets.
Production of the "shipwreck beer" is expected to start in mid-2014.


text:
Upper South
April, 2010
Regional Report
Web Finds
National Center for Home Food Preservation
Thinking about learning to can and freeze produce out of your garden or from a farmer%s market? Or, maybe it%s been years since you did preserving and want to find out the latest information? The National Center for Home Food Preservation, http://www.uga.edu/nchfp, is the primary source for current research-based recommendations for most methods of home food preservation. The Center was established with funding from the Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service in 200 as a multi-institutional effort with The University of Georgia and Alabama A&M University as the primary institutions. Recipes and recommendations are included in the site as well as an online self-study course, and videos available for purchase.
Favorite or New Plant
Sarastro Bellflower
Looking for a drop-dead, blue-flowered perennial? Then consider Sarastro bellflower. As with most campanulas, Sarastro produces stems with pendulous, bell-like flowers. These are about two-and-a-half inches long in a lovely shade of bluish purple and make great cut flowers. Unlike many campanulas, Sarastro spreads only moderately. Although catalogs say Sarastro grows only 18 inches tall, mine reached 36 inches. My plant of Sarastro was put into the garden in 2009 and produced a few bloom stems. By the spring of 2010, it had formed a clump about 15 inches across and bore a great many sturdy bloom stems. Supposedly, if I remove the faded bloom stems, it will bloom again. Sarastro needs only average, well-drained soil in full sun to part shade and is seldom bothered by pests.