COMMENTS: 29
Scapegoating Newsweek
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Media and Culture headlines via email.
What to do if the U.S. invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq have sparked a persistent and bloody resistance that eats away at the president's political capital?
Blame journalists.
That's exactly what the Bush administration and its rhetorical attack dogs are doing with the "scandal" over Newsweek's story on the desecration of the Koran at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo.
In a short item in its May 9 issue, Newsweek reported that U.S. military investigators had found evidence that U.S. guards had flushed a copy of the Koran down a toilet to try to provoke prisoners. This week, the magazine retracted, saying not that editors knew for sure that such an incident didn't happen but that, "Based on what we know now, we are retracting our original story that an internal military investigation had uncovered Koran abuse at Guantanamo Bay." (emphasis added)
Meanwhile, after the original story ran, Afghan and U.S. forces fired on demonstrators in Afghanistan, killing at least 14 and injuring many others.
The conventional wisdom emerged quickly: Newsweek got it wrong, and Newsweek is to blame for the deaths. The first conclusion is premature; the second is wrong.
First, it's not clear whether U.S. guards in Guantanamo or other prisons have placed copies of the Koran on a toilet or thrown pages (or a whole Koran) into a toilet. Detainees have made such claims, which have been reported by attorneys representing some of the men in custody and denied by U.S. officials. Newsweek's retraction is ambiguous, suggesting they believe the incident may have happened but no longer can demonstrate that it was cited in the specific U.S. government documents, as originally reported.
Given the abuse and torture -- from sexual humiliation to beatings to criminal homicide -- that has gone on in various U.S. military prison facilities, it's not hard to believe that the Koran stories could be true. Given that last month U.S. officials pressured the United Nations to eliminate the job of its top human-rights investigator in Afghanistan after that official criticized violations by U.S. forces in the country, it's not hard to be skeptical about U.S. motives. And given that even the human-rights commission of the generally compliant Afghan government is blocked by U.S. forces from visiting the prisons, it's not hard to believe that the U.S. officials may have something to hide.
Until we have more information, definitive conclusions are impossible. But if you go on a popular right-wing web site, youÃll find the verdict that administration supporters are trying to make the final word: Newsweek lied, people died.
Yes, people died during demonstrations, and political leaders in the Muslim world have cited the Koran stories to spark anti-U.S. feeling. But reporters outside the United States have pointed out that these demonstrations have not been spontaneous but were well-organized, often by groups of students. The frustration with U.S. policy that fuels these demonstrations isn't limited to the Koran incident, and to reduce the unrest to one magazine story is misleading. Indeed, Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at a news conference last week that the senior commander in Afghanistan, Army Gen. Carl Eichenberry, reported that the violence "was not at all tied to the article in the magazine."
So, why the focus on the Newsweek story? It's part of the tried-and-true strategy of demonize, disguise, and divert. Demonize the news media to disguise the real causes of the resistance to occupation and divert attention from failed U.S. policies.
The irony is that the U.S. corporate news media deserve harsh criticism for coverage of the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq -- not for possibly getting one fact wrong, but for failing to consistently challenge the illegality of both wars and the various distortions and lies that the Bush administration has used to mobilize support for those illegal wars.
We should hold the news media accountable when they fail. But we should defend journalists when they are used by political partisans who are eager to obscure their own failures.
Stay up to date with the latest Media and Culture headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Crazy H on May 17, 2005 12:59 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's look at something those mediots will never show you - the truth. There have been eye-witness reports of Korans in toilets since 2003. A pentagon official vetted the Newsweek story before it was published; if there was no truth behind the report they could have spoken up then. They chose not to.
They also chose not to react immediately after publication. It was only after eleven days of anti-US protests that our government decided to speak up; and then it was to put pressure on those that reported the abuses, rather than to speak out against the perpetrators. They didn't even bother with their usual tactic of claiming to investigate while waiting for the furor to die down.
The Right Wing Pundits should ask themselves and their audiences WHY the Middle East is so ready to believe these reports. After all - our army of liberation is given to murder, rape, torture, and sodomy; is it so hard to believe that they'd desecrate a Holy Book as well?
As for proof of media bias: Newsweek retracted the story under government pressure. I wouldn't call that bias - I'd call it outright propaganda.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Yet still more media bias...
Posted by: monkeywrench
» RE: Yet still more media bias...
Posted by: dennyduke@earthlink.net
Comments are closed-
Posted by: adp3d on May 18, 2005 2:31 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: steveruff on May 18, 2005 3:43 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: But are they
Posted by: bookwoman
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cushniesr on May 18, 2005 5:16 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I Agree
Posted by: lenal
Comments are closed-
Posted by: solrey on May 18, 2005 6:00 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: hispirits on May 18, 2005 6:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the real story lies in the possibility that the unnamed source of the Newsweek story was known by the administration and was forced to retract his statement, leaving Newsweek holding the bag!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Thoughts on Newsweek retraction
Posted by: bettsoff
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jobie1kno on May 18, 2005 6:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm sure you have photos of the 17 Afghan flag-draped coffins on your desk, alongside your Tiffany paperweight from the World Trade Center.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Mr Rumsfeld
Posted by: Iamnotafruittree
Comments are closed-
Posted by: MiiPandaa on May 18, 2005 6:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In fact, Newsweek moved rather quickly to get the word out about its loss of faith in what it had printed as soon as its Pentagon vetter backpedaled on what may or may not have happened at Gtmo involving copies of scripture. There is a world of difference between Newsweek's sloppy sourcing followed by earnest efforts to mitigate the damage versus the active lies that the B'Administration CHOSE to make (and continues to treat as fact despite blanching evidence to the contrary).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jules_siegel on May 18, 2005 6:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Editorial: Newsweek/It doesn't deserve the diatribes
May 18, 2005 ED0518A
[Excerpts]
White House spokesman Scott McClellan flat-out said Newsweek was responsible for causing the rioting in Afghanistan that led to at least 17 deaths. Newsweek editors appear to have accepted that responsibility. They shouldn't have; the White House is simply changing the subject from abuse at Guantanamo to Newsweek's journalism.
Newsweek used as a source a "senior government official," normally a Cabinet secretary or someone fairly close to that rank, who had previously been a reliable source. It then showed the report to two Pentagon officials before publication. One declined comment and one corrected another aspect of the story. Neither challenged the Qur'an-in-the-toilet statement.
Only after the report had been printed did the original source back away from his assertion that he had seen the confirmation in a military report on abuse at Guantanamo. On reflection, he thought perhaps he saw it in other reports or drafts; but he did see it.
Before the Newsweek item was even published, both the Associated Press and Agence France-Presse reported a new surge of Taliban-led violence.
This behavior seems so Nixonian, except that the current crew is much better at the press-intimidation game than William Safire and Vice President Spiro Agnew were. For Newsweek and other media that come in for this treatment, we have one word: Resist.
--
JULES SIEGEL Cancun Q. Roo Mexico
http://www.cafecancun.com/bookarts
Newsroom-l, news and issues for journalists
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: tintobrash on May 18, 2005 6:40 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Machiavelli must be smiling
Posted by: max'smom
Comments are closed-
Posted by: benu67 on May 18, 2005 7:36 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mick on May 18, 2005 7:49 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mick
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: monkeywrench on May 18, 2005 9:15 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm afraid that we are sunk unless we – the whole population – wake up, pay attention to our crap detectors, and DEMAND the truth; but I'm really afraid that it might require some event more catastrophic than anything in our history in order for us to wake from our self-induced national coma.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: zippyten on May 18, 2005 10:40 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is finally our proof in black and white of what many of us have known to be true for some time, that the Bush administration wanted to remove Saddam through military action by using terrorism and WMD as the excuse, and "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." This memo -- basically the minutes of a top secret meeting with top UK officials in July 2002 -- proves that the US and the UK went into Iraq knowing they were fabricating a war.
Not surprisingly, this story (top news in the UK) is being largely ignored by the US mainstream media to the point where many people have not even heard of the Downing Street memo. (Go to www.downingstreetmemo.com among other sites for more info.) The administration and the right wing media are making very sure that the Newsweek hysteria will take up all of our attention and focus while the smoking gun is quietly kicked under the carpet.
Our job is not to let this happen. Let as many people know about the Downing Street memo as possible. Continue to pressure Congress (though lots of luck there) and the media to investigate and publicize this information. We need to express our outrage and our refusal to let this immense travesty of American government go unchallenged.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Newsweek story red herring for Downing Street memo
Posted by: Ellen Remore
Comments are closed-
Posted by: eanderso on May 18, 2005 12:06 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The project is designed to diffuse the "red vs. blue" mentality and to undermine the extremists who seek to perpetuate the war of words. It's our belief that the majority of Americans don't agree with extremists attempts to hijack America. To check out the film and to view the trailer, please follow the link below:
http://www.redwhiteandbluemovie.com
Thanks to everyone who has supported this film so far. There is much, much more to come.
Sincerely,
Eric Anderson & Amelia Dellos
P.S. We're still seeking completion financing for the film, so if you're interested in contributing, please visit the "Support" tab of our website.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Union Guy on May 18, 2005 12:38 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gideonh on May 18, 2005 7:36 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good thing we have them around to remind us that warmongers and Presidents and Secretaries of Defense don't kill people, magazines and a free press do.
Pot, meet Kettle.
How many more times do they tell us our shoe is untied before we stop looking down at our collective feet? Apparently not enough.
By the way, your shoe's untied.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: lenal on May 18, 2005 8:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
lenal
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SteveB on May 18, 2005 11:05 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Newsweek printed a story that wasn't true simply because an unnamed government official told them it was true. This is now standard operating procedure for the MSM, which has turned into a machine for the uncritical dissemination of corporate and government news releases.
As a result, basic reportorial skills (like fact-checking) have atrophied to the point where mistakes like this are commonplace (e.g. CBS and Bush's nat'l guard memos).
Of course, the Newsweek story was "untrue" only in the narrowest sense of the word: the incidents almost certainly happened, but they weren't in a defense dept. report, as Newsweek claimed.
Which points out yet another problem with the MSM: facts aren't facts until the US gov't acknowleges them to be facts. This gives the gov't complete control of what qualifies as news. For example, civilian casualties in iraq arent news simply because the military deliberately refuses to count the bodies.
We need to get busy building an alternative media which can keep alive the basic craft of news reporting, because MSM outlets like Newsweek and CBS are beyond repair.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Shakti on May 19, 2005 8:26 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Many Daily Kos postings suggest that Newsweek was deliberately set up a la Dan Rather. Perhaps the "unnamed source" was used to trap Newsweek on a technicality: "sure, it's coming out in a report soon, go ahead and run with the story (ha ha)."
Without a doubt the flap over the WH trying to bring Newsweek to its knees has overshadowed other stories, like the Downing Street memo, the Left's reaction to Galloway, the nascent civil war in Iraq, the fillibuster. Actually the fillibuster is getting some peripheral Star Wars action.
But, as Molly Ivens has pointed out, where is the deafening public outcry over the fact that the U.S. is torturing people? I'm going to write my representatives, but can't the Dems show some leadership here?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ed Cross report
Posted by: papergirl
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Crazy H on May 17, 2005 12:59 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's look at something those mediots will never show you - the truth. There have been eye-witness reports of Korans in toilets since 2003. A pentagon official vetted the Newsweek story before it was published; if there was no truth behind the report they could have spoken up then. They chose not to.
They also chose not to react immediately after publication. It was only after eleven days of anti-US protests that our government decided to speak up; and then it was to put pressure on those that reported the abuses, rather than to speak out against the perpetrators. They didn't even bother with their usual tactic of claiming to investigate while waiting for the furor to die down.
The Right Wing Pundits should ask themselves and their audiences WHY the Middle East is so ready to believe these reports. After all - our army of liberation is given to murder, rape, torture, and sodomy; is it so hard to believe that they'd desecrate a Holy Book as well?
As for proof of media bias: Newsweek retracted the story under government pressure. I wouldn't call that bias - I'd call it outright propaganda.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Yet still more media bias...
Posted by: monkeywrench
» RE: Yet still more media bias...
Posted by: dennyduke@earthlink.net
Comments are closed-
Posted by: adp3d on May 18, 2005 2:31 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: steveruff on May 18, 2005 3:43 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: But are they
Posted by: bookwoman
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cushniesr on May 18, 2005 5:16 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I Agree
Posted by: lenal
Comments are closed-
Posted by: solrey on May 18, 2005 6:00 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: hispirits on May 18, 2005 6:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the real story lies in the possibility that the unnamed source of the Newsweek story was known by the administration and was forced to retract his statement, leaving Newsweek holding the bag!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Thoughts on Newsweek retraction
Posted by: bettsoff
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jobie1kno on May 18, 2005 6:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm sure you have photos of the 17 Afghan flag-draped coffins on your desk, alongside your Tiffany paperweight from the World Trade Center.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Mr Rumsfeld
Posted by: Iamnotafruittree
Comments are closed-
Posted by: MiiPandaa on May 18, 2005 6:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In fact, Newsweek moved rather quickly to get the word out about its loss of faith in what it had printed as soon as its Pentagon vetter backpedaled on what may or may not have happened at Gtmo involving copies of scripture. There is a world of difference between Newsweek's sloppy sourcing followed by earnest efforts to mitigate the damage versus the active lies that the B'Administration CHOSE to make (and continues to treat as fact despite blanching evidence to the contrary).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jules_siegel on May 18, 2005 6:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Editorial: Newsweek/It doesn't deserve the diatribes
May 18, 2005 ED0518A
[Excerpts]
White House spokesman Scott McClellan flat-out said Newsweek was responsible for causing the rioting in Afghanistan that led to at least 17 deaths. Newsweek editors appear to have accepted that responsibility. They shouldn't have; the White House is simply changing the subject from abuse at Guantanamo to Newsweek's journalism.
Newsweek used as a source a "senior government official," normally a Cabinet secretary or someone fairly close to that rank, who had previously been a reliable source. It then showed the report to two Pentagon officials before publication. One declined comment and one corrected another aspect of the story. Neither challenged the Qur'an-in-the-toilet statement.
Only after the report had been printed did the original source back away from his assertion that he had seen the confirmation in a military report on abuse at Guantanamo. On reflection, he thought perhaps he saw it in other reports or drafts; but he did see it.
Before the Newsweek item was even published, both the Associated Press and Agence France-Presse reported a new surge of Taliban-led violence.
This behavior seems so Nixonian, except that the current crew is much better at the press-intimidation game than William Safire and Vice President Spiro Agnew were. For Newsweek and other media that come in for this treatment, we have one word: Resist.
--
JULES SIEGEL Cancun Q. Roo Mexico
http://www.cafecancun.com/bookarts
Newsroom-l, news and issues for journalists
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: tintobrash on May 18, 2005 6:40 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Machiavelli must be smiling
Posted by: max'smom
Comments are closed-
Posted by: benu67 on May 18, 2005 7:36 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mick on May 18, 2005 7:49 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mick
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: monkeywrench on May 18, 2005 9:15 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm afraid that we are sunk unless we – the whole population – wake up, pay attention to our crap detectors, and DEMAND the truth; but I'm really afraid that it might require some event more catastrophic than anything in our history in order for us to wake from our self-induced national coma.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: zippyten on May 18, 2005 10:40 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is finally our proof in black and white of what many of us have known to be true for some time, that the Bush administration wanted to remove Saddam through military action by using terrorism and WMD as the excuse, and "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." This memo -- basically the minutes of a top secret meeting with top UK officials in July 2002 -- proves that the US and the UK went into Iraq knowing they were fabricating a war.
Not surprisingly, this story (top news in the UK) is being largely ignored by the US mainstream media to the point where many people have not even heard of the Downing Street memo. (Go to www.downingstreetmemo.com among other sites for more info.) The administration and the right wing media are making very sure that the Newsweek hysteria will take up all of our attention and focus while the smoking gun is quietly kicked under the carpet.
Our job is not to let this happen. Let as many people know about the Downing Street memo as possible. Continue to pressure Congress (though lots of luck there) and the media to investigate and publicize this information. We need to express our outrage and our refusal to let this immense travesty of American government go unchallenged.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Newsweek story red herring for Downing Street memo
Posted by: Ellen Remore
Comments are closed-
Posted by: eanderso on May 18, 2005 12:06 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The project is designed to diffuse the "red vs. blue" mentality and to undermine the extremists who seek to perpetuate the war of words. It's our belief that the majority of Americans don't agree with extremists attempts to hijack America. To check out the film and to view the trailer, please follow the link below:
http://www.redwhiteandbluemovie.com
Thanks to everyone who has supported this film so far. There is much, much more to come.
Sincerely,
Eric Anderson & Amelia Dellos
P.S. We're still seeking completion financing for the film, so if you're interested in contributing, please visit the "Support" tab of our website.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Union Guy on May 18, 2005 12:38 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gideonh on May 18, 2005 7:36 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good thing we have them around to remind us that warmongers and Presidents and Secretaries of Defense don't kill people, magazines and a free press do.
Pot, meet Kettle.
How many more times do they tell us our shoe is untied before we stop looking down at our collective feet? Apparently not enough.
By the way, your shoe's untied.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: lenal on May 18, 2005 8:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
lenal
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SteveB on May 18, 2005 11:05 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Newsweek printed a story that wasn't true simply because an unnamed government official told them it was true. This is now standard operating procedure for the MSM, which has turned into a machine for the uncritical dissemination of corporate and government news releases.
As a result, basic reportorial skills (like fact-checking) have atrophied to the point where mistakes like this are commonplace (e.g. CBS and Bush's nat'l guard memos).
Of course, the Newsweek story was "untrue" only in the narrowest sense of the word: the incidents almost certainly happened, but they weren't in a defense dept. report, as Newsweek claimed.
Which points out yet another problem with the MSM: facts aren't facts until the US gov't acknowleges them to be facts. This gives the gov't complete control of what qualifies as news. For example, civilian casualties in iraq arent news simply because the military deliberately refuses to count the bodies.
We need to get busy building an alternative media which can keep alive the basic craft of news reporting, because MSM outlets like Newsweek and CBS are beyond repair.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Shakti on May 19, 2005 8:26 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Many Daily Kos postings suggest that Newsweek was deliberately set up a la Dan Rather. Perhaps the "unnamed source" was used to trap Newsweek on a technicality: "sure, it's coming out in a report soon, go ahead and run with the story (ha ha)."
Without a doubt the flap over the WH trying to bring Newsweek to its knees has overshadowed other stories, like the Downing Street memo, the Left's reaction to Galloway, the nascent civil war in Iraq, the fillibuster. Actually the fillibuster is getting some peripheral Star Wars action.
But, as Molly Ivens has pointed out, where is the deafening public outcry over the fact that the U.S. is torturing people? I'm going to write my representatives, but can't the Dems show some leadership here?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ed Cross report
Posted by: papergirl
Half-Naked Hot Chicks and Beer: The Sexist Guyland of the Super Bowl Beer Commercial
Can Obama and Dems Overcome the Right's Talk Radio Monopoly?
Why We're Addicted to Disaster Porn




