Study: NYT failing to investigate the antiquities scandals
Its coverage has been staggering in terms of column inches, which has been by far the greatest of these three papers, and all the more so bearing in mind how few of its stories actually bring new information to the table or break some new angle. I don't find a single article that you could properly call investigative in the entire New York Times opus on this issue during this period, not a single inquiry of its own into the provenance of antiquities at the Metropolitan Museum of Art or any other museum or the legal ramifications of the accusations facing them. I find one, rather marginal development which the Times seems to have been the first to report, and that's Marion True posting bail in Greece in January 2007.
If you were expecting the Times to cover the Met the way the Globe covered the MFA or the L. A. Times covered the Getty, you would be disappointed. Often, the Times moved the story forward by simply citing the previous day's L. A. Times story about the investigations involving the Getty.
Read entire article at Roger Atwood, a visiting researcher at Georgetown University, in a paper delivered at a conference at Yale this past spring, as published by savingantiquities.org
If you were expecting the Times to cover the Met the way the Globe covered the MFA or the L. A. Times covered the Getty, you would be disappointed. Often, the Times moved the story forward by simply citing the previous day's L. A. Times story about the investigations involving the Getty.