Another Media Mea Culpa on Iraq

Following in the footsteps of The New York Times, The Washington Post has now admitted that it too was not vigilant enough in challenging the administration's rush to war in the paper.

Here's an excerpt:

An examination of the paper's coverage, and interviews with more than a dozen of the editors and reporters involved, shows that The Post published a number of pieces challenging the White House, but rarely on the front page. Some reporters who were lobbying for greater prominence for stories that questioned the administration's evidence complained to senior editors who, in the view of those reporters, were unenthusiastic about such pieces. The result was coverage that, despite flashes of groundbreaking reporting, in hindsight looks strikingly one-sided at times.

Better late than never, I suppose.