What Ever Gave Us Silly NYT Readers That Impression?

I was looking at this graf in particular in the New York Times piece from a week
ago Sunday in which it looked at its/Judy Miller's involvement in the Plame affair
(I like to avoid "gate" suffix and/or the more unbearable "l'affair Plame"):

In August, Douglas Jehl and David Johnston, two other Washington reporters, 
sent a memo to the Washington bureau chief, Mr. Taubman, listing ideas for 
coverage of the case. Mr. Taubman said Mr. Keller did not want them pursued because 
of the risk of provoking Mr. Fitzgerald or exposing Mr. Libby while Ms. Miller was
in jail.

Juxtapose that with Keller's statement that:

"...I fear I fostered an IMPRESSION (emphasis mine) that The Times put a higher 
premium on protecting its reporters than on coming clean with its readers."

This undermines the sincerity of Keller's mea culpa. Readers got that IMPRESSION 
because, at least in  that one instance, there's no denying that he DID put the 
interests of Miller and the NYT ahead of those of its readers. 

Why can't anyone just apologize straight-up anymore? No one is fooled by this 
hemming and hawing.