by Josh Wilde

Created on: February 22, 2008

The New York Times revealed that Sen. John McCain had an affair with a female lobbyist. Right? Wrong.

For a start, in what most ethical journalists would deem a "non-story", the Times said he had a "relationship" with her - but never actually stated that it was a romantic one. Guess what? I have a relationship with my bank, but the only screwing involved is in the fees it charges me.

It then said that 8 years ago, McCain's staffers warned him to stay away from her. Well, it didn't actually say that either. Instead, it quoted two anonymous "associates" of McCain's as saying it. Go ahead - try to prove or disprove that anonymous people actually said such a thing.

Indeed, what are "associates"? Are they top-level staffers? Clerical help? People he plays poker with? Or perhaps just the people who sweep up his office at night?

But let's give the newspaper which publishes "all the news which fits in print" the benefit of the doubt and say that there were, indeed, two people who told its reporters that they advised him to stay away from this lobbyist.

The first question you have to ask is whether they were telling the truth. The second question is, if they did actually say this to him, if their warnings were valid.

Some friends might warn me to tomorrow to stay away from Helium. They could say that being associated with it might hurt my reputation as a journalist. Should I agree with them? I think not.

Why then would the Times print such a story? It says it has been investigating it for several months - but it was only a short time ago that it endorsed McCain for the Republican nomination.

Why would this staid newspaper, known as the "Grey Lady", back a man who it suspected of having an improper affair with a lobbyist and letting this effect his official actions?

The fact is that it wouldn't. It came close to admitting this in the article when it wrote, "his confidence in his own integrity has sometimes seemed to blind him to potentially embarrassing conflicts of interest."

A man who is having an affair is not confident in his own integrity. A senator who allows his relationship (of any type) with a lobbyist to impact how he handles his job is also not confident in his own integrity.

However, the Times says that John McCain is confident about his integrity. Perhaps it is true that because he knows he did nothing wrong he did not worry about appearances. I have to wonder, however, if the Times, today, is also confident about its integrity.

Learn more about this author, Josh Wilde.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.