New York Times regrets publishing controversial Op-ed on South Sudan
June 10, 2016 (JUBA) – A United States-based global news organization, The New York Times, has admitted making a mistake by publishing a controversial opinion article which was alleged to have been authored jointly by South Sudanese leaders as an appeal to dodge justice and accountability mechanisms in the August 2015 peace agreement.
She admitted that they should have confirmed the authenticity of the document from both parties in order to avoid the one-sided story which has resulted to the controversy.
“This piece came to us through representatives of the government of South Sudan with assurances that they were working on behalf of both President Kiir and Vice President Machar. Today, we learned that Vice President Machar does not agree with the content of the op-ed,” Eileen Murphy, spokeswoman for The New York Times, told Washington-based Foreign Policy (FP) on Thursday.
“We should have sought direct confirmation of the argument of the piece from both parties,” Murphy added.
This came after officials in the office of the First Vice President, Machar, dismissed the claim that the document was co-authored by President Kiir and First Vice President, Machar, saying Machar did not draft or see the document.
Machar’s spokesman, James Gatdet Dak, said he wrote an email to The New York Times, asking the media outlet to correct their publication, saying the document’s content on justice and accountability was “irresponsible and falsified.”
The Foreign Policy in Washington on Thursday said they were also surprised that Machar would have suddenly changed his known stance in support for justice and accountability to try in hybrid court those responsible for serious crimes committed beginning from 15 December 2013 when the war broke out in Juba.
“But we at FP [Foreign Policy] weren’t the only ones surprised to see Machar reverse course and join Kiir in calling for “truth, not trials…,” said the Foreign Policy, suggesting that Machar had been vocal in seeing to it that justice must prevail.
It also said the argument presented by Ateny Wek Ateny, President Kiir’s press secretary that he was the overall spokesman in the Presidency and that the article was written in his office was also a reason to doubt the process involved.
“But even as he affirmed the article’s authenticity, Ateny added a layer of doubt, saying that he is the spokesman for the “whole presidency” and admitting that the op-ed “was written from my office,” Foreign Policy further added.
It said when Ateny was asked whether Machar involved in the drafting of the alleged joint document, he did not respond to an email from Foreign Policy.
“Ateny did not respond to an email Thursday asking how exactly Machar had been involved in the drafting process,” it added.
A HIRED FIRM INVOLVED
However, Ateny revealed that the President’s office or his office hired a Washington-based public relations firm in drafting the controversial document and ensuring that The New York Times published it.
“But in an interview with journalist Jason Patinkin, Ateny all but admitted that the piece had been produced in conjunction with a Washington-based public relations firm, though he did not say which one,” said Foreign Policy, adding that Ateny argued, “It’s the right of anybody to employ [a] consultancy.”
The new revelation suggested that the document was worked out through a third party.
NEW YORK TIMES CRITICISED
Another United States major global news organization, The Washington Post, has published a story, criticizing The New York Times for publication unverified Op-ed article.
In the article titled, “Who wrote that op-ed? The New York Times isn’t sure”, the Washington-based major news organization described the publication of the controversial opinion article as a “blunder.”
The New York Times has sparked an international incident by publishing an op-ed article under the byline of a foreign official who never agreed to it, according to his supporters,” wrote The Washing Post on Friday.
“The newspaper this week blundered into the bloody politics of South Sudan, the fledgling east African nation, by posting a column ostensibly written by that country’s president and first vice president, Salva Kiir and Riek Machar, respectively,” it added.
“Only one problem: Machar’s supporters say he didn’t sign on to the editorial and doesn’t agree with it. They suggest the Times was effectively hoodwinked by Kiir’s faction into running the column with his name on it.”
Newspapers such as The New York Times and The Washington Post, it said, routinely receive proposed columns from government officials and others through intermediaries.
In this case, the Times said it received assurances from a third party, which it didn’t identify, that it represented both the president and vice president of South Sudan.
“In retrospect,” an official of The New York Times told The Washington Post, “we obviously should have taken it a step further” and verified that both men gave their assent.
In a speech at the United Nations on Thursday, David Pressman, the U.S. representative for special political affairs, said he was surprised and disappointed by the editorial published by The New York Times.
He said reconciliation and justice go hand in hand as in the peace agreement.
“As we have seen in countless other settings after widespread violence, reconciliation and justice are mutually reinforcing, not mutually exclusive,” he said.
“And that is precisely why both are included in the August 2015 peace agreement, and it is precisely why the United States will continue to make every effort to both support the African Union in its establishment of the hybrid court.”
The argument over the document has been making headlines in local and international media organizations due to its sensitivity and controversy.
However, the matter seems to be put to rest as it becomes clear that the alleged co-authored opinion article was unilaterally drafted by the President’s office – with the help of a hired unnamed Washington-based public relations firm – without involvement of the First Vice President, Machar, or his aides.
The peace deal inked by the top rival South Sudanese leaders to end 21 months of civil war has called for establishment of a hybrid court, to be facilitated by the African Union (AU), to put to trial those responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
(ST)