Why is the Media Still Railing Against New York Officials for Their Added Subway Security?

The media has been doing a bang-up job of reporting everything that went wrong with the recent subway terror alert in New York City.

It's already been established that the alert was based on dubious information supplied to the New York political leadership by the federal government.

Whose fault is that? New York's or Washington's?

New York officials have the right to protect the public from potential terrorist threats and their response was right on. They would have been crazy to ignore signs that their subway system may have been targeted by Ansar al-Islam or al-Qaeda itself.

Instead of reporting the facts, the media seems obsessed with pointing out that the alert never should have been called and that Mayor Bloomberg should have treated the information given to him with a grain of salt. And here we go again with unidentified sources.

The terms "law enforcement sources" and "government sources" and "sources close to the investigation" appear again and again throughout the stories posted on CNN, on MSNBC, and on CBS (not as bad as the first two).

ABC went in the opposite direction, saying that the threat was NOT a hoax (according to "sources involved in the investigation"). Further, ABC reported what other news organizations were saying with their unnamed sources.

Fox News came right out and said that the sources were unnamed and also said that the Mayor of New York was uncertain about reports that the threat was a hoax. Further, they included a disclosure that they were owned by News Corp., which also owns the New York Post and other companies that were reporting the story.

ABC's and Fox's stories report more hard facts than the others (which are laced with opinions and unnamed sources).

Is it time for more Rathergate? Some of these stories read like works of fiction, and not hard news.