Photograph of David Rohde, second from right, and Tahir Ludin, third from right, by James Estrin/NY Times
Rohde's escape has been viewed as miraculous but the Times' secrecy has drawn some criticism. The Times admitted to not reporting on the kidnapping to lessen the risk to Rohde's life and even got other news organizations, including Al-Jazeera, to agree on a news blackout. AP senior managing editor John Daniszewski told the Washington Post, "It is not the most comfortable position to be in. Your instinct is to publish what you know. But we felt there was just too high a risk something would happen to him." And this past week, the Times revealed it worked with Wikipedia to keep the kidnapping off the Wikipedia website.
During Rohde's captivity, the Times was actively working for his freedom—ABC News says Taliban guards were bribed, by the Times-hired private security company with CIA ties, though, "It was not clear what role, if any, [the bribes] may have played." Gawker asked the Times "if the paper plans to publish a first-person account by Rohde of the kidnapping and escape," to which the Times spokeswoman replied, "There is nothing I can say about this at this point."





While getting into danger should not be a life goal in itself, I think this man can die happy knowing that he was able to get home to his family after an adventure like that.
You just don't hear stories like that anymore. Good for him!
The Times did the right thing. If they had publicized the event, he might not have survived. However, we don't know all the details. Was ransom demanded?
Were there any negotiations ? I guess we'll have to wait for the book.
Meanwhile, in a corner office on the 52nd floor, "Damn. More fuckin' payroll."