Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Blogging Taught Me How Dishonest MSM Can Be

Before I started blogging I knew much of MSM reporting was biased and some of it outright dishonest.

We all saw the dishonesty in Sept. 2004 when Dan Rather and CBS defended their bogus 60 Minutes Texas Air National Guard story accusing President Bush of not fulfilling his TANG duties.

For almost two weeks Rather and the network insisted the anonymous source of the forged document on which they based the 60 Minutes story was "unimpeachable." But they knew all along he was Bill Burket, a long-time Democratic activist and Bush-hater who at the time was actively campaigning against the President.

As shocking as Rather and CBS's serial lying was, I treated it as what the Brits call a "one off."

But once I started blogging and had to research stories, I realized Rather and CBS's deception wasn't a "one off" but something that was often just "business as usual" in the MSM world.

One of the most shameful examples of MSM dishonesty I encountered while blogging is exposed in the post below which I published Oct 16, 2007.

When I called the N&O story in question to the attention of Melanie Sill, then the N&O's executive editor for news, she never responded.

Ted Vaden, then the N&O's public editor, first told me the story had come from the NY Times' wire (true).

When I told him the N&O was nevertheless responsible for printing it and should retract it, with the retraction including at least a link to Gen. Sanchez's speech, Vaden became angry and said the N&O wasn't in business to satisfy me.

John

Now to the post: On Sanchez, The N&O Deceived Us


Readers Note: Portions of this post are cut and paste from a copy of General Sanchez's speech which was all in capital letters.
______________________________________________________

Across the top of the McClatchy Company’s liberal/leftist Raleigh News & Observer’s October 13 front-page ran the headline:

Iraq a 'nightmare,' general says

A year after his retirement, Ricardo Sanchez, who led U.S. forces during the Abu Ghraib scandal, levels a broad, biting attack
The N&O’s story began:
In a sweeping indictment of the four-year effort in Iraq, the former top commander of American forces there called the Bush administration's handling of the war "incompetent" and said the result is "a nightmare with no end in sight."

Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, who retired in 2006 after being replaced in Iraq after the Abu Ghraib prisoner-abuse scandal, blamed the Bush administration for a "catastrophically flawed, unrealistically optimistic war plan" and denounced the current addition of American forces as a "desperate" move that would not achieve long-term stability.
There’s a lot more in the story. It all flows nicely with the opening paragraphs.

The entire N&O story is here.

But nowhere in its report of Sanchez’s speech (full text here), delivered Oct. 12 at the Military Reporters and Editors luncheon in Washington, did the N&O tell readers Sanchez said to the journalists:
TOUGH REPORTING THAT RELIES UPON INTEGRITY, OBJECTIVITY AND FAIRNESS TO GIVE ACCURATE AND THOROUGH ACCOUNTS … STRENGTHEN OUR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AND IN TURN OUR DEMOCRACY.

ON THE OTHER HAND, UNFORTUNATELY, I HAVE ISSUED ULTIMATUMS TO SOME OF YOU FOR UNSCRUPULOUS REPORTING THAT WAS SOLELY FOCUSED ON SUPPORTING YOUR AGENDA AND PRECONCIEVED NOTIONS OF WHAT OUR MILITARY HAD DONE.
About half of Sanchez speech was like that: sharp criticism of unscrupulous reporting of the Iraq War by many journalists and news organizations.

A trustworthy newspaper would have told us that. The N&O didn't

Here’s more of what Sanchez said:
OTHER MAJOR CHALLENGES ARE YOUR WILLINGNESS TO BE MANIPULATED BY "HIGH LEVEL OFFICIALS" WHO LEAK STORIES AND BY LAWYERS WHO USE HYPERBOLE TO STRENGHTEN THEIR ARGUMENTS.

YOUR UNWILLINGNESS TO ACCURATELY AND PROMINENTLY CORRECT YOUR MISTAKES AND YOUR AGENDA DRIVEN BIASES CONTRIBUTE TO THIS CORROSIVE ENVIRONMENT.

ALL OF THESE CHALLENGES COMBINED CREATE A MEDIA ENVIRONMENT THAT DOES A TREMENDOUS DISSERVICE TO AMERICA.

OVER THE COURSE OF THIS WAR TACTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT EVENTS HAVE BECOME STRATEGIC DEFEATS FOR AMERICA BECAUSE OF THE TREMENDOUS POWER AND IMPACT OF THE MEDIA AND BY EXTENSION YOU THE JOURNALIST. IN MANY CASES THE MEDIA HAS UNJUSTLY DESTROYED THE INDIVIDUAL REPUTATIONS AND CAREERS OF THOSE INVOLVED.
Even if you’re a Democrat who worries that if America succeeds in Iraq it could be good for Republicans, don’t you think the N&O should have reported at least some of Sanchez blistering exposure of so much of MSM's Iraq War “reporting?”

Especially this:
THE DEATH KNELL OF YOUR ETHICS HAS BEEN ENABLED BY YOUR PARENT ORGANIZATIONS WHO HAVE CHOSEN TO ALIGN THEMSELVES WITH POLITICAL AGENDAS.

WHAT IS CLEAR TO ME IS THAT YOU ARE PERPETUATING THE CORROSIVE PARTISAN POLITICS THAT IS DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY AND KILLING OUR SERVICEMEMBERS WHO ARE AT WAR.
Don’t you agree the Bush-hating, Moveon.org types at the N&O should have at least reported General Sanchez said some journalists’ and news organizations’ partisan politics “are destroying our country and killing our service members who are at war?”

Sometimes I ask myself whether I’m too hard on the N&O and other such MSM news organizations.

But the N&O’s deliberate deception concerning what Sanchez actually said, which deception most other MSM news organizations also engaged in, leaves me thinking I’m not too hard on the N&O and other news organizations whose actions are, as General Sanchez says, "destroying our country and killing our service members.”

I’ll send N&O executive editor for news Melanie Sill and public editor Ted Vaden links to this post and invite their responses.

Both Sill and Vaden tell readers the N&O observes the very highest of ethical journalism standards and that its news reporting is fair and accurate. There are many devoted N&O readers who believe that.

You'll get a good idea of their journalism ethics and what they mean by fair and accutate if read the N&O's story here and General Sanchez's speech here.

Americans who want this country to survive and our troops to have as much protection as possible need to do things to lessen the influence of MSM and get the truth out there.

In the coming days I’ll be posting about things we can do to help make that happen.

The Sanchez story reminds of of how urgent and important that task is.

Hat tip: Mike Williams

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

The sad truth is that much of the MSM is controlled by political operatives. Owners of the media can trade this sort of political favor and influence for payback.
This is usually quite subtle -- it can be done by hiring an echo chamber and promoting based on "performance".

There is a ready pool of people to hire -- public monies are doled out by political operatives who use grants in the humanities (most universities take in more money from the Federal Government than any other source) to encourage the same sort of systemic bias in academia.

Our society is profoundly harmed by the politicization of the press and the academy.

Anonymous said...

Our society is profoundly harmed by people who espouse opinion as fact. If you've read this blog through the years, you're familiar. Those in the MSM aren't perfect, but I'll take their work any day over the pontificating and bloviating done on blogs such as this one. I'm not a "liberal/leftist" as John is fond of saying. And just because I disagree with you, I'm not a "troll." I still believe in the power of the press and know, from firsthand experience, that most of those who work for publications such as the N&O are there to do good. It was the N&O, not bloggers, I must point out, who unearthed the Meg Scott Phipps scandal and the Jim Black scandal and it is the N&O that is bringing to light serious ethical issues related to former Gov. Mike Easley and his wife. You criticize. And criticism is important to the wellbeing of the republic. But it's also easy. And cheap.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 11:21PM:

"Those in the MSM aren't perfect, but I'll take their work any day over the pontificating and bloviating done on blogs such as this one"

Interesting.

When do you think the N&O will start "bringing to light" the ethical lapses of Duke and DPD related to the lacrosse rape hoax?

Ken
Dallas

Anonymous said...

Hi anon 11:21,

John posts about a news report that proves the N&O and the NYT were dishonest by not reporting what Gen. Sanchez said about MSM's lack of ethics and contributing to the deaths of our troops in Iraq.

He even links to Sanchez' speech so we can check it out for ourselves.

That causes you to attack John.

Nice, nice.

You sure you're not a troll?

RhondaRShearer said...

Boy, can I relate to your story. I used to think that media told the truth but the harsh reality is otherwise. My experience led to my creating a media ethics program, go to http://www.StinkyJournalism.org.

Truth telling takes fearlessness and self sacrifice--something that the profit-driven media will not do. They act as if accountable only to shareholders and not to citizens and the public's trust.

Please check out our case studies and contact me. Our new case involves Jared Diamond's fake history in The New Yorker about Papua New Guinea murders and rapists--one man, Henep Isum, who was supposed to be paralyzed in a wheelchair from a cut spinal cord...we found him walking around and feeling just fine.

Anonymous said...

To 11:21, from 5:12:

Yes, this is my opinion. It happens to be a very well informed opinion, based on years of close-hand observation. I don't care to go into the specifics, and there's no particular reason anyone would take me at my word on these in any event.


Consider my position a hypothesis and test it against data points you do accept as fact. After all, the best way to unearth the truth is to generate lots of hypothesis and then to discard those that don't fit with the facts. History has shown that many people who are "there to do good" have repeatedly been misdirected and have actually wound up enabling great harms.

BTW, have you noticed that many in the media have been "people who espouse opinion as fact"? In truth, there is a whole industry that is about giving people opinions to hold, bypassing facts altogether (to start, think of the entertainment side of media).