Last week, New York Times public editor (the equivalent of an ombudsman) Arthur Brisbane wrote a blog post asking whether, in covering the campaign, reporters should challenge in the body of their straight-news stories statements by candidates that are dubious, distorted or outright false. Or as he put it—in a headline that generated unsurprising outrage from his commenters—“Should the Times Be a Truth Vigilante?”
My short answer, I say in my dead-tree TIME column this week (subscription required): yes. The longer answer: yes, but he did make a point that’s worth talking about.












