Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

WMDUH!

By Matt Taibbi, New York Press. Posted January 24, 2005.


Was the end of the WMD hunt last week actually 'little noted' or was it simply 'little covered'?
Advertisement

The world little noted, but at some point late last year the American search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq ended. We will, however, long remember the doomsday warnings from the Bush administration about mushroom clouds and sinister aluminum tubes; the breathless reports from TV correspondents when the invasion began, speculating on when the "smoking gun" would be unearthed; our own failures to deconstruct all the spin and faulty intelligence. – New York Times editorial, Jan. 13

The timorous admission made by the White House last week that it had given up pretending to search for WMDs in Iraq was an occasion for much smugness and finger-pointing in most of the major dailies.

Among the rest of the population, this laughably tiny news item – I'm writing this column on Jan. 13, but by the time this hits the newsstands on the 18th, it will surely, and amazingly, have been a dead story for days – was mainly fodder for two minutes of office water-cooler gloating among the anti-Bush crowd.

It is unrealistic to expect anything different. In the run-up to the war, every major daily and television network in the country parroted the White House's asinine WMD claims for months on end, all but throwing their panties on stage the instant Colin Powell showed what appeared to be a grainy aerial picture of a pick-up truck to the U.N. Security Council.

Justice would seem to demand that a roughly equivalent amount of coverage be given to the truth, now that we know it (and we can officially call it the truth now, because even Bush admits it; previously the truth was just a gigantic, unendorsed pile of plainly obvious evidence). But that isn't the way things work in America. We only cover things around the clock every day for four or five straight months when it's fun.

O.J. was fun. Monica Lewinsky was fun. "America's New War" was fun – there was a war at the end of that rainbow. But "We All Totally Fucked Up" is not fun. You can't make a whole new set of TV graphics for "We All Totally Fucked Up." There is no obvious location where Wolf Blitzer can do a somber, grimacing "We All Totally Fucked Up" live shot (above an "Operation We All Totally Fucked Up" bug in the corner of the screen). Hundreds of reporters cannot rush to stores to buy special khakis or rain slickers or Kevlar vests in preparation for "We All Totally Fucked Up." They would have to wear their own clothes and stand, not in front of burning tanks or smashed Indonesian hovels, but in front of their own apartments.

That is why we will never get four months of the truth, to match four months of preposterous bullshit. The business is not designed for it. It just can't happen.

Most Americans instinctively understand this and accept it. Even those people who are consciously offended by this set of circumstances accept it. It is as natural to us as the weather.

However, there are times when this phenomenon seems to go a little too far. This is one of those times.

Countless news organizations last week took the same pathetic, transparently disingenuous position vis-a-vis the WMD flap that The New York Times did in the above passage. The basic media lie – the new lie, not the old lie – was a two-pronged thing. It went something like this:

First, Bush admitted there were no WMDs, but so few people cared that it was "little noted" around the world. Phrases such as "quiet conclusion" (CBS News) or "quietly ended" (USA Today) or "quiet denouement" (the Virginia Pilot) reinforced this idea that the story was somehow inherently quiet and of small import.


Digg!

Matt Taibbi lives in New York. He covers politics for Rolling Stone and the New York Press.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Media and Technology! Sign up now »

Why Everyone Loves Hot, Smart Older Women
Sex and Relationships: The word "desperation" has disappeared from the definition of "cougar"; words like smart, successful and funny have taken its place.
By Vanessa Richmond, The Tyee. October 10, 2008.
How Badly Can the 'Experts' Ruin the Planet?
ForeignPolicy: Look no further than the World Bank to see how many economic, social and environmental problems so-called experts can make worse.
By Robin Broad, John Cavanagh, AlterNet. October 10, 2008.
How Scary the Economy Would Be in McCain's Hands
Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace: McCain's economic plan contradicts his recently held fundamental views and is far out of touch with the needs of the country.
By Jared Bernstein, Huffington Post. October 9, 2008.

Advertisement