Michael Gordon is not an actual person, but rather a voice-activated tape recorder.

"I'm not sure why everyone didn't figure this out before now," said a NY Times insider, pointing to the fact that, in Gordon's 26-year career, all of "his" stories have consisted entirely of transcribed statements by anonymous government officials.

According to anoher insider, the tape recorder was purchased for $27.95 at a Radio Shack on West 43rd Street. Describing the situation as "a prank" that had "gotten slightly out of hand," the insider said the paper had decided to acknowledge Gordon's identity because after the tape recorder's front page story today, "Deadliest Bomb in Iraq Is Made by Iran, U.S. Says"— there "was no place left to take the joke."

The insiders "really had a good laugh" while editing the Iran story, which is based on the following sourcing:

U.S. Says...United States intelligence asserts...reflects broad agreement among American intelligence agencies...civilian and military officials from a broad range of government agencies provided...military officials say...The officials said...The assessment was described in interviews over the past several weeks with American officials...Administration officials said...according to the intelligence...According to American intelligence...Some American intelligence experts believe...they assert...notes a still-classified American intelligence report...a senior administration official said...according to Western officials...Officials said...An American intelligence assessment described to The New York Times said...Other officials believe...American military officers say...American officials say...According to American intelligence agencies...Assessments by American intelligence agencies say...Marine officials say...American intelligence agencies are concerned...Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said last week.

"You can't deny that's funny," said the insider, adding that the lack of skepticism displayed by Gordon was "literally inhuman." The insider asserted that the Iran article is "even more hilarious" than Gordon's 2002 stories on Iraq's purported nuclear program, written with Judith Miller.

According to the paper's management, the Times plans to keep the tape recorder on its staff indefinitely, given that it does not require health insurance and its voice-activation feature "saves a lot of tape." Indeed, the tape recorder formerly known as Michael Gordon has already filed its own story on the matter, consisting entirely of transcribed statements from anonymous government officials.

Gordon, Perino, Miller, et al appear firmly fixed in the "stenography" sort: repeating what is told to them without much (if any) reflection and even less investment in the possible consequences. They're just concerned about getting their stories out and their names on as many bylines as possible.

The "investigative" sort, exemplified by Seymour Hersh and James Bamford, is now the exception rather than the rule. Its also (depending on subject) a slow-going process and out of place in the 24/7/365 news cycle our culture is exposed to.

It doesn't help that there's no reliable indicator of either the attention span of the American citizen any longer, nor any way to guage how much 'hard' information/facts they've can or will absorb on a given story. One would think that given what we know of the Administration's policies/actions to date there would be routine burnings-of-Bush-in-ephigy around the country.

Instead we hear a lot about Uma Thurmon's stalker and the latest episode of "Dancing With The Stars". I despair at the state of world my children will likely inherit.

I have to laugh when bloggers complain that other bloggers have abandoned facts for opinion.

Great article. Was it Seymour Hersch who wrote in his article the Iran Plan that the U.S. and Israel had sent in special forces into Iran working on the ground. Mossad trainng Iranians posing as Quds forces? Would not put anything pass the Mossad or U.S. special forces.

By the way Judy Miller and Micheal Gordon did not "mindlessly" print what Bush adminstration officials were feeding them. They lied to the American public "mindfully"

If these publications are so willingly printing the administrations views why aren't they asking why we're not stopping it? The accept it as a certainty, but if indeed our intelligence is that good why aren't these individuals being intercepted at the borders or the camps in Iraq they are at? It seems extremely disingenuous to accept so easily that we know this and not ask why we're unable to do anything about it.

that the military would allow this to happen. Start a war with Iran when we have 140,000 troops in Iraq, a bomb's throw away? Have they all gone mad?

Secretary Gates seems like a fairly intelligent, thoughtful person. I would hope that he would resign in protest if it came to actually attacking Iran. I can't imagine a more stupid move. But I could have said the same about the invasion of Iraq...

The way I see it, if we do attack Iran, I'd be very surprised if any ground units were contributed. It'll likely just be a bombing campaign on behalf of Lockheed, General Dynamics, Boeing, etc.

The Iraqi occupation has made billions for Halliburton, Blackwater, et. al., but there wasn't much of an air campaign, and not much aerial bombing after the major combat portion of the conflict "ended." This Administration would hate to leave a significant portion of the military industrial complex unhappy with their tenure in the WhiteHouse. (Hate for these Great Corporate Patriots to be *forced* to sell their wares abroad to nations hostile to the U.S.) Therefore, we'll have one last orgy of death and destruction aimed at those who would so much as verbally threaten our American (or more accurately Israeli?) way of life.

USA! USA! USA!

PS- the "disruption" to oil stocks caused by bombing a major supplier of the world's oil will provide a great boost to oil prices and all linked to it. So the bigwigs in Irving, Texas won't have much to complain about either...

$5/gallon anyone?

After all their defference tothe Bush propoganda machine, the New York Times will still be denounced by theRight-Wing media as "Liberal Elitists".

Perhaps the Sultsberger family hopes that, by Foxifying themselves, Mr. Murdoch will not crush them anyway, now that he has NewsDay in his stable. Not a chance.