Tag: Media

  • TIMESNOW Untold Story II

    Continuation of 20 Million paycheck I Rank Borrowed Clip TimesNow Untold Story I

    Six years on, Goswami’s nightly debate show, The Newshour, has become the cultural and economic centre of Times Now. “It’s the centre of the solar system,” a senior manager at the channel said. Discussions about Times Now are invariably discussions about Goswami, whose abrasive moderation every weeknight has inspired angst-ridden open letters, a stream of parodies, and even standup comedy routines. The Newshour runs anywhere between 60 and 120 minutes and, partly by dint of its variable length, attracts more viewers than competing shows with fixed slots at 9 pm. Its advertising rates are among the highest for prime time news television, at Rs 16,000 for a ten-second spot. And the show is so vital to the relevance and well-being of the network that “60 percent of the editorial resources are used for The Newshour”, the senior manager said. It pulls in 40 percent of the channel’s overall viewers, and a fifth of its Rs 1.5 billion annual revenue.

    Goswami isn’t shy about letting staff know that his show pays their salaries—its advertising revenue, the senior manager told me, nearly covers the channel’s approximately Rs 340 million wage bill, including Goswami’s own Rs 20 million paycheck. As his name became a stand-in for the channel, Goswami could do as he wished. He exercised this right roughly, creating an organisation obsessed with breaking news and setting the agenda to the exclusion of everything else. From the inner pages of newspapers he plucked events scantly explored but rich with emotional resonance….

    Goswami the Man.

    ‘When I called Goswami to request an interview for this story, he declined, saying that he was interested in reporting the news, not becoming it. Reasoning that he was just a regular newsman, he expressed surprise that anyone would pick him as a subject, and offered that I was welcome to come by his office for a cup of tea if I agreed not to write the story. Shortly after my call, according to two current Times Now employees, Goswami informed his staff in Mumbai and Delhi that a magazine was writing about him, and asked them not to cooperate with any interview requests—a plea his employees took as an order.

    In private, Goswami had no doubt that his channel was no ordinary news organisation, and that he was no ordinary newsman. In a speech to the newsroom in 2011, which was recorded by a former reporter, Goswami made it clear he believed the channel’s place in history was already secure: “Can the history of India be written honestly without the contribution of Times Now to a new form of journalism in the era that we are in?” he said. “Think about it. Think about the bigger picture. I can tell you it can’t be written.”

    The Panel Handling.

    he only two benchmarks for prospective guests, the desk editor said, were that “both sides should speak flawless English, and should be extremely aggressive”. The show is meant to be partly debate, partly journalism, and partly—if Goswami has his way—a public confessional. But it is mostly an open-ended chunk of airtime from whose centre Goswami live-directs an intellectual reality show where dramatic things happen. Participants abuse other guests and the show’s host. People walk away, leaving empty windows behind.

    As a matter of principle, The Newshour pits people and their extreme views against one another—but its main character is always Goswami. A typical episode finds him demanding answers, making accusations, riling up participants and passing judgment, venting the angst of a man upset by how far his country has fallen. His pronouncements are rooted in everyday frustrations: Why is Pakistan dithering? Why can’t Australians admit that they’re racist? Why is the government indifferent to the middle class? Who is responsible for all this?

    “I think that a lot of people must realise that the editor-in-chief of Times Now is someone who has excelled himself at executing, to the T, the brief that was handed down by the management,” the former high-ranking editor said. “The brief was to be relevant on urbane issues to the urban viewer…

    The activist and academic Madhu Kishwar, a frequent but exasperated guest, penned a widely-circulated open letter to Goswami, complaining that “panelists are expected to simply come and lend further strength to the anchor’s delusion that one hour of Newshour will rid India of all its ills”. The senior manager explained Goswami’s approach. “He feels TV is about drama. You have to stir something up or the audience will be lost. He sees his role as livening things up.”..

    The Private view and the Public comment.

    In his recent book Pax Indica, Shashi Tharoor, the former minister of state for external affairs, recalled sitting for “a lengthy interview at the Ministry of External Affairs with a particularly egregious TV anchor—famed for his hectoring rants on assorted peeves, mostly unsupported by either fact or reason”. Tharoor did not name the anchor, but the subject was “a crisis in Indian-Australian relations” that he blamed on “channels whipping up mass hysteria” over alleged racist attacks on Indians, a campaign Goswami had pounded for weeks on end. “The cameras stopped to change their tapes,” Tharoor wrote, “and in the ensuing break I asked him whether he was really serious about the kinds of things he was alleging on air. ‘How does it matter?’ he asked perfectly reasonably. ‘I’m playing the story this way, and I’m getting 45 percent in the TRPs. My two principal rivals are trying to be calm and moderate, and they’re at 13 percent and 11 percent.’”

    Source.Caravan magazine.

    http://www.caravanmagazine.in/reportage/fast-and-furious?page=0,2

    No comments are necessary.

    http://ramanisblog.in/2012/12/29/20-million-paycheck-i-rankborrowed-clip-timesnow-untold-story-i/

    Enhanced by Zemanta
  • 20 Million Paycheck I Rank Borrowed Clip TIMESNOW Untold Story I

    TIMESNOW news Channel in India occupies 1 Rank among news channel viewership.

    Whether it reports News or Anchor’s views is debatable.

    Its News hour at Prime Time at 9 pm Daily is watched by Millions, not so much for News but to observe a man’s views being thrust on the panelists.

    Or how to scream and twist a story;to brand a group as villain, Be it a Politician makes a stupid comment, a theft is reported(Police is pilloried),a rape is unearthed(Men in general and Government in particular),…

    But not a word will be mentioned of Sonia Gandhi!

    I have been under the impression that Mr.Arnab Goswami is assuming this facade,like Mr.Karan Thapar to draw out the interviewees, then I caught on.(read my post’ Karan Thapar interviews  Ms.Jayalalithaa’)

    The Man is made that way, highly egocentric who believes that no body other than him is right ,

    Please read my blogs on this and TIMESNOW coverage.

    Also watch the video towards the closing of this post 2  how Mr.Goswami ‘motivates’

    ‘There will be no other News Channel next year’…

    I know you do not get credit due to you…

    I do not know hoe to inculcate,”

    Caravan Magazine has written an excellent piece on the subject.

    Excerpts.

    On Borrowed clips  on Mantralaya Fire, Bombay

    “Producers at Times Now, which calls itself “India’s most-watched English news channel”, borrowed footage from a Hindi channel until their broadcast vans reached the place at 3.20 pm, and the channel’s reporters and cameramen began to record pictures and describe the scene. A jittery camera found frightened people inching away from blazing windows on a ledge high above. A man dressed in white, just out of reach of the firemen, swung down from an air conditioner’s holding cage, put one foot on an open window frame a floor below, and gingerly reached out to another window, a few feet away, with the toes of his other foot. Nothing but the ground lay beneath. His desperate bid to stay alive replayed every few minutes, looped on a split screen alongside live images of the spreading flames.’

    How the Channel beats its rivals by swift action and clever presentation.

    but once the cameras were ready and footage streamed in to Times Now’s main bureau in central Mumbai, the operational machinery that set it apart from other channels came alive. Raw pictures of the fire arrived at the bureau’s “ingest room”, where two technicians were standing by. Under normal circumstances, footage is pushed through from here to the edit room; edited clips are conveyed onward to the output desk, and then launched into space from the production control room. For this event, the machine was primed to behave less like a conveyor belt and more like a catapult. Incoming footage was diverted straight to the production room, with words tacked on remotely as the digital footage streamed by. The entire chain of events, from recording to broadcast, took less than 30 seconds. This streamlined process was the primary reason editors and reporters said Times Now was unmatched in live coverage; as one former Times Now journalist told me, “There is no bureaucratic delay, as there is with other channels.” But nimbleness was only one reason why Times Now had consistently beaten its more established rivals in the ratings from late 2008 until early 2012. The frenetic coverage of the Mantralaya blaze demonstrated the channel’s other strength: a flair for creating drama.

    By 4.20pm, Times Now had five reporting teams at the scene. (“We kind of went berserk that day,” a senior producer told me.) The broadcast cut rapidly from one reporter to the next, while the live images from the fire took up less than half the screen area: the rest of this real estate pulsed with banners and headlines. Over the course of one typical minute—between 6.04pm and 6.05 pm—there were 58 studio-induced flashes on the broadcast. No bar stayed still, words evaporated and reappeared, and at the centre of this sea of red and blue were reporters performing the simple task of describing what the viewer could see for himself. “We used to call it deaf and dumb,” said Naman Chaturvedi, a former associate producer who handled on-screen graphics. “Hum jo bolte the woh likhte the. Jo likhte the woh dikhate the. Jo dikhate the woh sunate the. (What we spoke was what we wrote was what we showed was what we told you.)”

    Before becoming the editor-in-chief at Times Now, Goswami had spent nine years at NDTV, rising to head its national news desk. At Times Now, he scorned his former employer openly, letting everyone know that the network was lumbering and irrelevant; he referred to it as “the white elephant”. “It was said to us, quote unquote, ‘Let NDTV do their social service,’” a former high-ranking editor who was part of Goswami’s core team said. When Rajdeep Sardesai, who had been Goswami’s boss at NDTV, launched CNN-IBN in December 2005, one month before Times Now went live, the ambushed newsroom watched nervously. (Goswami tried to keep up his team’s morale by trashing the new channel in text messages to his staff, a member of the Times Now launch team recalled.) To make matters worse, CNN-IBN quickly asserted itself against NDTV. Goswami had worked under Sardesai for almost a decade, and despised him so deeply that his son had made a charming drawing of Goswami triumphing over his former boss. Goswami is a dedicated father, and he proudly displayed it in his office.

    The channel’s first victory in the ratings gave Times Now a legitimacy that had been elusive while it trailed NDTV and CNN-IBN since its beginnings in January 2006. Staffed with reporters from other channels and newspapers, the network began life as an unusual hybrid under an editor who was only 33 years old. It aired general and business news during the day, and light programming at night, a format that had been approved by the Times Group’s powerful proprietors, the brothers Vineet and Samir Jain. The mix was unique—news channels were usually one thing or another, not both—but weekly numbers were poor. What the channel stood for was unclear. An output editor from the core team who worked closely with Goswami recalled that “nobody watched the channel.

    http://www.caravanmagazine.in/reportage/fast-and-furious?page=0,1

    Source: Caravan Magazine.

    Enhanced by Zemanta
  • How Six Corporations Control Media in US

    In Democracy information is Power.

    Those who control Media control the shape the Democracy and the Government.

    Read my blog on http://ramanisblog.in/2011/01/01/media-ownership-details-india/

    Now look at US Media Holding. For a larger and detailed Picture click on the image.

    This infographic created by Jason at Frugal Dad shows that almost all media comes from the same six sources.

    That’s consolidated from 50 companies back in 1983.

    NOTE: This infographic is from last year and is missing some key transactions. GE does not own NBC (or Comcast or any media) anymore. So that 6th company is now Comcast. And Time Warner doesn’t own AOL, so Huffington Post isn’t affiliated with them.

    But the fact that a few companies own everything demonstrates “the illusion of choice,” Frugal Dad says. While some big sites, like Digg and Reddit aren’t owned by any of the corporations, Time Warner owns news sites read by millions of Americans every year.

    Here’s the graphic

     http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6#ixzz2AbGEoVSK

    llusionofChoice.jpg
    Media Holding, US.
    Enhanced by Zemanta
  • NDTV Sues Nielsen over TV Programme Rating,Manipulation.

    English: NDTV 24x7 logo
    English: NDTV 24×7 logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
    Image representing Nielsen as depicted in Crun...
    Image via CrunchBase

    Lesser men like you and I have been, though hearing the sound bites from Statistic honchos(Statistics normally conceals more than it reveals like a Bikini), have this question nagging at the back of our minds.

    How come these guys , for a country as big as India, seem to rate viewer ship with lots of Data, calling prime time,Super Time, Super A etc, with none of us knowing how they do it?

     

    Though they said that thy have some gadget ifs fixed at households and that it reveals details of Channels you have surfed with time.

     

    But to the best of my knowledge ,I have never seen a Gadget in any of the homes nor have I know of any one knowing this much detail, the least!

    If these surveys are extensive, well.. it is the best kept Secret!

     

    Imagine Television Channels and Advertisers investing Crores of Rupees for Prime Time on such findings.

     

    Well, all good things must end one day.

     

    NDTV a News Channel in India has filed a case against Nielsen  who say the th maters of this sort of thing, accusing them of that their System of Rating is out dated.

     

    It transpires that for a country of the size of India with….

    Television in India is a huge industry which has thousands of programmes in many languages. The small screen has produced numerous celebrities, some even attaining national fame. TV soaps are extremely popular. Approximately half of all Indian households own a television.[1] As of 2010, the country has a collection of free and subscription services over a variety of distribution media, through which there are over 515 channels of which 150 arepay channels.[2] According to Pioneer Investcorp, the Indian cable industry is worth INR  270 billion (US$4.89 billion) and is the third largest in the world aftertelevision in the People’s Republic of China and television in the United States. The number of TV homes in India grew from 120 million in 2007 to 148 million in 2011. Cable reaches 94 million homes with 88 million analog connections and 6 million digital ones, while DTH has commanded 41 million subscribers.[3]

     

    has a sampling of 8160 boxes, with 50-60 boxes per Target Group!

     

    The flip-side of it is that when there was a Fire accident in Maharashtra Secretariat, Mantralaya, the Rating showed that there was no viewer ship(Zero viewer ship) from the age group ’25 Years Male’ in Mumbai where the fire was raging!

     

    Another issue raised by NDTV is that the Nielsen people manipulated the rating by tampering the Boxes(at last there were some boxes!)

    “On April 3, 2012, a meeting was held between the representatives of NDTV, namely, Rahul Sood, Sidharth Barhate and Anand Mohan Jha, and two field staff employees of TAM (one provided his first name, while the other did not disclose his name) at Ramada Plaza Hotel, Juhu, Mumbai. The TAM employees revealed that they were employed in Mumbai to look after, and collect data from, TAM meters.

    They stated they were willing to manipulate TAM ratings in Mumbai. They showed their identity cards and represented themselves as TAM employees. They also showed TAM manuals to the representatives of NDTV and explained how the meters operate, and the number of meters /areas that they looked after. They were also aware of NDTV’s ratings. They had been in touch with NDTV representative as mentioned above, therefore, during the meeting they insisted upon NDTV’s permission to activate the system at the earliest so that NDTV could see prompt results of high TRPs as promised by these persons. They claimed to have effected manipulations in the past for other channels and were willing provide the same “services” for “any” channel that was ready to pay the demanded consideration (bribe). They were confident that they could triple channel ratings of NDTV in Mumbai over a period of two to three weeks in the required target group. They stated they had direct access to homes and visited those homes periodically (at least 3 to 4 times a week) and were in a position to easily influence what the households watched/viewed. They said by paying a bribe of $250 to $500 per household per month, the TAM households could be made to watch only those channels which they insisted upon…”

    Very Nice.

     

    What is NBA doing except advertising in TV channels by way of scroll mesaages’If you have a complaint blah, blah?

     

    May be it is not the channels that are to be complained against.

     

    It  was the complaint of the Channels.

     

    So they keep quiet.

     

    Let’s see how far this joke goes.

     

    As for as I am concerned it will be show as usual and all the guys will co-exist .

     

    http://ibnlive.in.com/news/ndtv-sues-nielsen-over-tam-rating-manipulation/276822-44-124.html

    Broadcaster New Delhi Television Ltd is seeking more than a billion dollars in damages from The Nielsen Co. and its affiliates, claiming the global research firm fudged viewership data.

    NDTV filed a case against The Nielsen Co. in a New York court for “manipulating television viewership data in favour of channels that were willing to offer bribes to its officials,” according to a news report filed by The Hollywood Reporter late last week.

    NDTV is seeking “compensatory and punitive damages” from the Nielsen group, Kantar group, TAM Media Research Pvt. Ltd and a host of Nielsen directors including its global chief executive David Calhoun for causing financial loss and loss of reputation and brand value by releasing incorrect viewership data, according to the petition, a copy of which is available withMint.

    TAM is a joint venture between Nielsen and Kantar (the market research arm of London-based advertising and public relations firm WPP Plc) in India and was launched in 1998 to provide television viewership data.

    “Low ratings for NDTV news channels have also led to public claims by other news channels of being the number 1 (one) channel,” the broadcaster said in its petition. “This loss of hard-earned reputation and goodwill along with the damage to the profitability of NDTV as a result of low advertising revenues has in turn severely damaged the brand value of NDTV.”

    The broadcaster is demanding $810 million (Rs.4,520 crore) for fraud and $580 million for negligence, in addition to other claims, according to the petition.

    It’s claiming the damages for “loss of advertising revenues, increased carriage costs, loss of reputation, loss of goodwill, loss of stock value, and loss of other revenues,” the petition added.

    A TAM Media spokesperson declined to make a statement, saying the company “doesn’t comment on any litigation.” NDTV officials said they could not comment as the matter is in court.

    According to the petition, after NDTV exposed rampant corruption and security breaches in TAM data to top officials of the Nielsen group and Kantar, it requested them to stop releasing data until the issues were resolved. But despite promises of remedial measures, the companies did not take corrective action and continued to publish “data corrupted by lack of security and lack of adequate sample size,” it said.

    Both NDTV and the News Broadcasters Association had requested TAM to increase the sample size to 30,000 and strengthen security measures.

    TAM’s website states that it “has the largest sample in the world comprising 36,000 individuals from across 165 cities and towns covering 8,150 TV homes from class I towns (all towns and cities with a population of more than 100,000) and semi-rural towns (less than 100,000 population) from the state of Maharashtra.”

    http://www.livemint.com/2012/07/31150447/NDTV-sues-Nielsen-over-ratings.html?h=B

    The TAM system consists of boxes which are installed in a few homes, which then give data on channels watched, their periodicity, etc — all of which are key inputs for advertisers, which is the lifeblood of TV news channels, especially since they get only one fifth of the subscription revenue they are entitled to from cable operators.

    Industry sources cite numerous instances to point out the gross misrepresentation of the TAM system. The latest instance is this year’s Week 25 TAM viewership data of Mumbai showing “zero viewership” among young males who come from an affluent background.

    In technical jargon, this segment would be called “male 25 years plus age group (analog) for target group AB” for June 21, the day the Maharashtra Mantralaya caught fire. ” It is impossible that this could happen, given the huge audience interest in the story which was followed through the day as lead. Yet the TAM data showed that no one from the city in the Males 25+ AB audience among the analogue homes had tuned into any of the English news channels. This is clearly an indicator of the kind of homes where TAM meters are installed and gross misrepresentation of English news channel viewers in the TAM panel,” a broadcaster said. Industry heads also say that there is no third party audit in the measurement system.

    Sources explained that in any news channel, even after thousands of interviews in a small city for an exit poll, the final results are different and that too for a considered decision where the future of a nation is being decided. “For a decision of which channel to watch we can well imagine how just 50-60 boxes per target group per city are telling you what your consumers are watching,” a media head said. The NDTV plaint too makes the point that the small sample size meant that “bribing and manipulating only a select number of homes” could cause significant change in data.

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/TAM-system-outdated-unrepresentative/articleshow/15332025.cms

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_in_India

  • ‘New York Times Killed Me’ NYT Reporter.

    Image representing New York Times as depicted ...
    Image via CrunchBase

    Visiting a troubled area is fraught with danger, especially when you are in pursuit of  hot stories.

    Chasing a Pulitzer or Booker that would bring in cheers and laurels is fine , but at what cost?

    If the Reporter had any sense he should have declined to travel and if refused should have quit.

    You can not have the cake and eat it too.

    Misplaced bravado and accusation!

    ‘Ed Shadid, the cousin of dead New York Times foreign correspondent Anthony Shadid, caused a stir over the weekend when he claimed in a speech that Anthony pre-emptively blamed the Times for his death in Syria, telling his wife: “If anything happens to me, I want the world to know that the New York Times killed me.” In an interview with Gawker, the surviving Shadid confirms the account and says the Times knew a trip to Syria was too dangerous, but sent him anyway.

     

    In his speech at the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee‘s convention on Saturday, which was initially reported on Twitter and later by Politico, Shadid said that his cousin didn’t want to go on the reporting trip to war-torn Syria that led to his death, reportedly from an asthma attack, in February. On the night before he left for Syria, Ed said, Anthony was “screaming and slamming on the phone in discussions with his editors.” In his last telephone call with his wife, Ed says, Anthony gave his “haunting last directive that if anything happens to me I want the world to know the New York Times killed me.”

    Update: Anthony Shadid’s widow Nada Bakri (herself a Times staffer) has issued a statement via Twitter.

    I do not approve of and will not be a part of any public discussion of Anthony’s passing. It does nothing but sadden Anthony’s children to have to endure repeated public discussion of the circumstances of their father’s death.

    In an interview, Ed Shadid—an Oklahoma City physician and city councilman—told Gawker that his cousin didn’t want to go to Syria in February, didn’t feel like he had the support of his editors, and had been previously warned off a Syria trip by a Times security consultant.

    “Did he want to go at that time?” Shadid said. “Did he feel like he had the logistical support necessary? The answer is no.” According to Ed, a Times security consultant reviewed a plan to infiltrate Anthony and his photographer Tyler Hicks across the border between Turkey and Syria in December 2011, but rejected it as too dangerous. “There was a security advisor who said, in no uncertain terms, ‘You are forbidden to enter Syria,’” Ed says. “So Anthony wrote an email to Tyler Hicks and says, ‘Hey man, it’s off. We’re not allowed to go.’” But roughly six weeks later, Ed says, Anthony’s editors reversed course and asked him to go anyway.

    “The situation was worse on the ground than it had been in December,” Ed says. “The only thing that had changed was that CNN had gained access to [the rebel stronghold] Idlid. My understanding is that CNN gaining access bothered his editors.”

    The night before Anthony left his home in Beirut for Turkey to begin the journey into Syria, Ed says, he was overheard on the phone with his editors “screaming at them and saying, ‘This is horseshit,’ and slamming down the phone.” He doesn’t know the specifics of what the arguments were about, but claims that Anthony felt he wasn’t supported by the Times. He asked for camping equipment to bring along on the journey through the mountainous border, Ed says, but his editors said no. When the 43-year-old reporter complained about the physical demands of the journey, Ed says, Times foreign editor Joseph Kahn responded, “It sounds like you’re going to get a lot of exercise on this assignment.”

    In a statement, the Times said that it “respectfully disagrees with Ed Shadid’s version of the facts” and that the paper “does not pressure reporters to go into combat zones. Anthony was an experienced, motivated correspondent. He decided whether, how and when to enter Syria, and was told by his editors, including on the day of the trip, that he should not make the trip if he felt it was not advisable for any reason.” Asked repeatedly whether a security consultant had rejected the Syria trip in December, Times spokesperson Eileen Murphy declined to comment.

    Whether or not Anthony—a lifelong smoker—wanted to go to Syria, his cousin says, he was in no shape to be there. “When I saw Anthony in December, he wheezing,” he says. “But the New York Times had never asked him to take a physical. If you are going to send someone across mountainous terrain with gun smugglers who could—and did—abandon the journalists, shouldn’t you have a sense of whether they were physically capable? I don’t think a physician would have signed off on him travelling this arduous terrain in the cold.”

    Contrary to a report from one Twitter correspondent who heard Ed’s speech, Shadid’s family is not pursuing legal action against the Times, even though he says he has “audiotapes and email evidence” to back up his claims. All he wants, he says, is to start a conversation about steps that the Times and other papers can take to better protect the safety of its correspondents. “How much would it cost to do an annual physical exam?” he says. “Or mandate basic medical training? These are not expensive, complicated things.” (According to Ed, Anthony’s companion Hicks improperly performed CPR on the stricken reporter.)

    Ed had previously spoken at several memorial events for his cousin, each time raising questions about whether the Times and other papers can do more to ensure the safety of their correspondents.

    “While the specifics of this case are important,” Ed says, “the bigger issue is what commonsense reforms can we put in place to protect journalists, at all newspapers.”

    He’s also concerned that the official narrative of Anthony’s death—he died of an asthma attack exarcebated by the presence of horses—doesn’t wash. The emphasis on asthma comes from Hicks, who wrote that Anthony sustained increasingly severe allergic reactions to the horses they travelled with. But according to Ed, Anthony took has young daughter to horseriding lessons once a week without any adverse reactions. “They put out a story that Anthony Shadid died from asthma—according to who? Dr. Tyler Hicks?” Ed says Hicks’ account of Anthony’s final moments—he “stopped and leaned against a large boulder [and] collapsed onto the ground…already unconscious and [not] breathing”—is much more consistent with a heart attack than an asthma attack. He also says an autopsy was performed on Anthony’s body in Turkey, and wonders why he hasn’t seen the results. “We don’t have them,” he says.’

    http://gawker.com/5921090/dead-new-york-times-reporter-anthony-shadid-allegedly-told-his-wife-the-times-killed-me?utm_source=Gawker+Newsletter&utm_campaign=f9477e6a06-UA-142218-2&utm_medium=email