New York Times

The New York Times initially ignored Contra drug trafficking stories in the 1980s, then attacked the Dark Alliance series in 1996, before ultimately confirming key elements of the Central Intelligence Agency-Contra drug connection in 1998. The paper's shifting coverage reflected the broader pattern of mainstream media resistance to the Contra-drug story.¹

The 1980s

In May 1986, Senator James Eastland's office planted a false story in the New York Times stating that the Justice Department had "cleared" the Contras of any involvement in gun running and drug smuggling, a statement the Justice Department was later forced to recant. The New York Times, along with the Washington Post and Los Angeles Times, had confidently reported throughout the 1980s that there was no truth to claims of Contra drug trafficking.²

Attacking Dark Alliance

On October 20, 1996, the New York Times ran a long story attacking Gary Webb's reporting, taking the same tack as the Washington Post: admitting that the basic facts were true and then arguing they did not prove CIA complicity. When Mercury News editor Jerry Ceppos published his May 1997 column acknowledging "shortcomings" in the series, the New York Times, which had ignored the original series, splashed Ceppos's apology on its front page. An editorial lauded Ceppos for his "courage."³

1998 Vindication

A notable exception to the media's continued silence came when the New York Times was leaked conclusions from the CIA's then-classified investigation by Inspector General Fred Hitz. On July 17, 1998, it reported on its front page that the Agency had working relationships with dozens of suspected drug traffickers during the Nicaraguan conflict and that CIA higher-ups knew it. The report confirmed central elements of what Webb had alleged two years earlier.⁴