Apr 10, 2015 4 min read

Excerpts from recent editorials in newspapers in the United States as compiled by the Associated Press:

Columbia Journalism School’s eviscerating report on Rolling Stone’s now-discredited article about the alleged gang rape of an unnamed female student at the University of Virginia comes in the midst of an impassioned national debate about sexual assault on campus. But let’s not get confused: The issue at hand is not whether students are being sexually assaulted or whether universities are too lax or too lenient on perpetrators. Rather, it is whether and how journalists can honestly and responsibly cover these complicated subjects. In this case, the journalists failed.

The reporter and her editors at Rolling Stone failed to verify basic information from their source, and they failed to contact the people who could have corroborated – or contradicted – the story.

To hear Rolling Stone tell it, those oversights came about because the reporter wanted to be particularly sensitive to a woman who claimed to be the victim of a sexual assault. But it is unacceptable to compromise the truth in the name of sensitivity. As we all know, sexual assault has been viewed in society as such a stigmatizing occurrence that victims have often been reluctant even to report it. But none of that excuses media organizations from their responsibility to diligently and thoroughly examine the cases they cover.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel has gone into overdrive against a nuclear agreement with Iran. On Monday, his government made new demands that it claimed would ensure a better deal than the preliminary one that Iran, President Obama and other leaders of major powers announced last week. The new demands are unrealistic and, if pursued, would not mean a better deal but no deal at all.

Netanyahu wants to appear reasonable. But he offers no workable options.

There are important details to be worked out before a final agreement is expected to be concluded by June 30. Even so, the framework is surprisingly comprehensive and offers the best potential for preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

Iran’s leaders would not accept a deal in which they did not maintain some elements of a nuclear program tailored for energy and medical purposes. The alternative is no deal, and Iran simply moves forward on its nuclear program without any limits.

The Israelis have also said there should be no agreement or lifting of sanctions until Iran recognizes Israel. Iran’s hostility and threats toward Israel and its involvement in terrorist activities are heinous and unacceptable. But those issues should be dealt with separately.

Getting to a final deal won’t be easy. Mr. Obama must continue to be tough and determined in the coming months of negotiations. Israel’s demands, however, must not become an excuse to scuttle what seems to be a very serious and potentially groundbreaking deal.

Five years ago this month, 29 miners were killed at the Upper Big Branch mine in West Virginia’s Raleigh County. It was the deadliest mine disaster in the nation in 40 years, and it put the spotlight on a variety of factors that were believed to have contributed to the disaster. Tragically, some of those factors persist despite efforts since then to bolster safety.

Investigations have shown that the combination of excess methane gas and flammable coal dust sparked the explosion on April 5, 2010, at the Upper Big Branch mine – a set of circumstances that had brought citations for safety violations on numerous occasions before at that location owned by Massey Energy Co.

So far, Congress has done nothing to strengthen regulators’ tools in regard to mines that have shown a history of neglect or disregard for the safety rules.

Until that happens, too many mines will continue to fall short of important safety standards, and miners’ lives will be at undue risk.