Frequently, a careful reader of foreign policy coverage in the New York Times finds oneself confronted by a headline or lead paragraph which seems to be clearly contradicted by the article that follows. And, in such cases, it often appears that the contradicted claim bears a remarkable resemblance to the State Department line. Such examples would seem to be clear evidence of an editorial bias in favor of current U.S. government policies.
Case in point: an article below the byline of Alissa Rubin, "Oil Law Stalls in Iraq as Bomb Aims at Sheiks," in Monday's New York Times.
The lead paragraph cites the delay as a blow to "efforts to achieve national reconciliation." But as the article reports, the draft oil law in question is not about revenue-sharing, as many seem to believe, but about the "system for managing and developing Iraq's oil resources," including the very controversial question of the role of multinational oil companies.
