Obama...Los Angeles Times "videotape" controversy! Unbiased reporting?

When I spied a few twitters on the Internet last night over the Los Angeles Times scandal that has been brewing over the past twenty-four hours - I got the distinct impression from the musings of a handful of blog writers - that the editors at morning daily were wrongfully "withholding" incriminating evidence which established Obama's questionable past associations with individuals of dubious character.

On the heels of the brouhaha - management at the TIMES responded to McCain's finger-pointing - by publishing an account of their own version of events in what appeared to be a sincere effort to shed light on the issues.

For those of you in the dark, McCain is alleging that the daily "intentionally suppressed" a videotape it obtained through "unknown" sources which allegedly reveals Barack Obama at a 2003 banquet acknowledging a friendship with a leading Palestinian scholar and activist, Rashid Khalidi.

In response, the editors were adamant in their rebuttal piece - that contrary to what McCain believes - the newspaper sought to bring the matter to the public fore.


The editor noted for the record that - if anything - the daily simply sought to protect a confidential source who provided the tape on the provisio that it not be released.

The Times keeps its promises to sources, Editor Russ Stanton asserted to the media, in the wake of the controversy.

Management did not respond to the McCain's allegation that they were inclined to favor Obama, though.

Stanton either sidestepped that issue or overlooked it perhaps?

For the most part, the paper's arguments appear to be reasonable, under the circumstances.

But, can the LA TIMES be trusted to report fairly on the issues without bias?

After all, they are at the heart of the controversy.

It wouldn't be the first time a news organization - or media outlet - pulled the old soft-shoe to get themselves out of a tight fix.

Is there an independent "body" - a media watch organization - that can be called upon to act as a mediator in the dispute?

If not, perhaps the current crisis cries out for one to be established, to ultimately preserve the integrity and ethical standards of the media at large in the future.