Arianna Huffington has an excellent piece on The Miller's Tale in today's Los Angeles Times. The key point: "There is no way that the Times' repeated claims that Miller was in jail as a matter of principle can be squared with her hair-splitting explanations for why she suddenly changed her mind."

Very true.

Any newspaper is likely to be the least credible source of information when it's reporting on itself. Even if the paper's report is identical to that of every other paper, that report is still dishonest because the paper is refusing to provide the information it knows and noone else does. In the case of Miller, the paper knows all the details of its dealings with its own attorneys and its attorneys' dealings with the prosecutor and with Libby's attorneys -- yet it provides none of that information. By definition, it's not telling readers information it has -- information which is vital to allowing readers to assess the accuracy of the paper's official statements and putative reporting.

If anything, the Times should simply publish a statement that it cannot accurately report on itself and urge readers to find alternative sources of information. And use the remaining space for more real estate ads.

p.s. Arianna and the LAT might want to borrow Scooter Libby's dictionary. (I kid because I love, and because I'm fair and balanced.)