NYT public editor Daniel Okrent periodically lets his readers have their say. In this instalment, they offer their perspectives in his columns on NYT reporters appearing on TV and numeracy.

On numeracy, Eric K. Foster wrote: Numbers without context - and fictional ones concocted for selfish ends - saturate the media. I am dismayed The Times does not have a numeracy department.

Actually, I don't know of anyone who does.

For any journos who trip over this posting and feel like accusations of innumeracy could be directed at them, here's some help:

Test yourself with the NICAR interactive math test.

If you flunk it, consider buying Numbers in the Newsroom: Using Math and Statistics in News, by Sarah Cohen.

I have lots more resources in this area, so leave a comment below if you'd like more and I'll post further on this topic.

BTW, my original posting on the Jan. 23 Okrent numeracy column can be found here.

The scribes on TV column was published Feb. 6. It primarily dealt with reporter Judith Miller making a stunning claim: That the Bush administration was reaching out to Ahmad Chalabi and had offered him a cabinet post in a new Iraqi government! Funnily enough, this blockbuster didn't appear in the NYT itself. Ever.

Here's what a few reader/writers had to say:

The implications of Judith Miller's revelations, or insinuations, on MSNBC's "Hardball With Chris Matthews" are much more serious than you let on. They allege that the composition of the future Iraqi government is decided by the Americans and not by the newly elected Iraqi legislature. Ergo, the elections were a sham.

This is a very grave accusation to be made in an indirect way without revealing the source. If not true, it is of immense harm to the United States.

MORDECAI SHELEF
Bloomfield, Mich., Feb. 6, 2005

You're not doing your job very well by allowing the reporter Judith Miller to avoid you and the executive editor, Bill Keller, to stonewall you. Mr. Keller can't respond to you because "Judy faces a serious danger of being sent to jail for protecting a confidential source."

He and Ms. Miller can't discuss new assertions about Ahmad Chalabi with the public editor, but it's O.K. for her to go on television?

DAVID DAVICH
Winter Park, Fla., Feb. 6, 2005

Most of the people who wrote (admittedly not a large total number) thought having Times reporters on TV was a good thing and that it added to their understanding of a story.