Journalist "was inaccurate" shock

This article is like one of those reviews at Anandtech or The Pabster - except perhaps the NYT should borrow an idea from the latter and put conclusions on page 10 so you can skip to the end without reading the eight pages in between.

While the report mentions stacks of stories that its reporter wrote which it claims were made up, it's obviously unsure just how many of them were accurate or inaccurate.

Because on page 10 it asks readers to let the editorial board know if any other stories Jayson Blair wrote were inaccurate.

Implying that it hasn't really got any idea how many, in its own words, contained "widespread fabrication and plagiarism".

Here. µ