Times Delayed China Espionage Story

By BETH J. HARPAZ
.c The Associated Press

NEW YORK (AP) -- The New York Times has confirmed that it acceded to the FBI's
request and held for one day a front-page story about China's theft of U.S.
nuclear secrets. A second request was rejected.

The article said that China had miniaturized its nuclear bombs using
information stolen from Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. The
story was supposed to run on March 5.

The FBI asked the Times to delay the article because the main suspect in the
theft, a Taiwanese-American scientist, was due to be interviewed by the bureau
that day.

The story contained at least two facts the scientist didn't know, including
his failing a lie detector test, Times executive editor Joseph Lelyveld told
The Washington Post.

Lelyveld told the Post that when the FBI asked the Times to hold off for a
second day, he said he would only do so if FBI Director Louis Freeh called him
directly. When Freeh failed to call by 7 p.m., Lelyveld went ahead with the
story. It appeared March 6.

The story did not name the suspect, Wen Ho Lee. Two days later, he was fired.
He has not been charged.

Times spokeswoman Lisa Carparelli confirmed that the Times delayed publication
for a day at the FBI's request. She was unable to provide further details and
Lelyveld did not return a call for comment.

Bill Carver, an FBI spokesman in Washington, refused to comment.

Columbia Journalism Review editor Marshall Loeb said the practice of editors
delaying stories at the request of government officials is appropriately rare.

``It is legitimate for an editor to hold a story for a brief period if he or
she has persuasive reason to believe that reporting it might endanger national
security or hurt a significant criminal investigation,'' Loeb said Monday.
``But such withholding should be done only rarely and only when a really
important issue is at stake.''

Loeb said the most famous example of a newspaper honoring such a request was
when President Kennedy asked the Times to withhold disclosing the Bay of Pigs
invasion before it began.

``They withheld it much to the regret of one and all,'' Loeb said. ``Had the
information been revealed, there might have been sufficient public outcry to
get the whole operation called off. In the end, the operation was a total
fiasco.''



Reply via email to