Leading US Daily (WP) Admits Underplaying Stories Critical of White House

[G_j]

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0812-01.htm

Published on Thursday, August 12, 2004 by the Agence France Presse

Leading US Daily Admits Underplaying Stories Critical of White House Push for Iraq War


WASHINGTON - The Washington Post became the latest prestigious US newspaper to question its own coverage of Iraq leading up to the US-led war, saying it underplayed stories questioning White House claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

"Administration assertions were on the front page. Things that challenged the administration were on A18 on Sunday or A24 on Monday," said Pentagon correspondent Thomas Ricks.

"There was an attitude among editors: Look, we're going to war, why do we even worry about all this contrary stuff?" he added.

In retrospect, said Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr., "we were so focused on trying to figure out what the administration was doing that we were not giving the same play to people who said it wouldn't be a good idea to go to war and were questioning the administration's rationale.


..more..

[rawstory]

1. Dupe.

but it definitely needs spreading, thanks!

[RedSock]

2. amazing just jaw-droppingly amazing

"why do we even worry about all this contrary stuff?"



*this* is our media. what a sad state of affairs.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

3. In a perfect world...

The owners would be throwing Len Downie out a window, right about now.

Sadly, this is not a perfect world...

[AspenRose]

4. I just heard about this on "The News Hour"

Said the NYT did the same thing in May.

*raises eyebrow* What's going on here?

[G_j]

10. why now?

I don't know. When the events of 2003 were being trotted out by all the media at new years, did they acknowledge the peace movement that had worked night and day to prevent the war? Not really. They are way late on this one. Someday I'd like see charges brought against some of these people. After all the war was/is illegal.

[flaminbats]

5. we can't expect all of the truth everytime..

only selected truth at the correct time. :smoke:

[Tight_rope]

6. Well Well Well...everyone is coming outta the closet today!

[dave29]

7. hah

true - but expect this mea culpa to be swept under the rug

[berry]

8. Amazing that this was written by Howie Kurtz.

The view he gives of internal office politics is damning. I for one had no idea that Pincus was not held in the highest esteem. The garbage Downey et al. were spewing about his "bad" writing is positively insulting, not only to Pincus but to the readers. As if we all need spoon-feeding by the likes of them! GRRR.

(this is just by way of a kick--no one should miss reading this)

[WEagle]

9. amazing is right

they must not think very highly of their readers

[The Zanti Regent]

11. Boycott the WHORESHINGTON POST advertisers!

Hit these assholes where it will hurt. Boycott anything that advertises these asslicking Nazi whores!

[Nimrod]

12. Three words come immediately to mind

"Rats"

"Sinking"

"Ship"

[baldguy]

13. "Liberal Media" my ass!

[truth2power]

14. Too little, too late!

They've helped to sell this country down the river. NOW, they tell us how sorry they are. :nopity:

If Bush gets reselected, the media can be assured that their complicity helped to destroy everything this country stood for.

If they want to redeem themselves, they better start...like, YESTERDAY....reporting the real news.

[kayell]

15. "The voices raising questions about the war were lonely ones"

Across the country, "the voices raising questions about the war were lonely ones," Downie said. "We didn't pay enough attention to the minority." (from the WP article)

Strange, I remember 100s of thousands speaking out and raising questions in DC, NY, SF, etc, etc. Not to mention the MILLIONS in Europe and around the world.

[mhollis]

16. Media Bias Alert

We did the same thing. I saw tons of footage over the Associated Press Television Network coming in from all over the world, including places that generally don't protest US actions, like Latin America and Eastern Europe while our anchorperson was beating the drum of war.

I was absolutely certain that we were going to war as soon as Shrub began trying to convince Americans that Saddam Hussein was Osama bin Ladin.

[gratuitous]

17. No, they weren't

And Kurtz' self-serving characterization of the "minority" voices (which were in reality the majority of voices) as "lonely" is disingenuous claptrap. The only reason the majority appeard to be a lonely voice is because media outlets such as the Post and the Times were too busy banging their war drums to notice. Millions of people demonstrated in the streets all over the country, yet the only coverage you were likely to find was about disputes between the cops, who would say there were only 5,000 marchers, and protest organizers, who would claim 30,000.

Or, if some reporter actually got off his or her overpaid duff, they went straight to the guy in the rainbow fright wig, or the disaffected kid with 32 facial piercings, and write up an account that made it sound like these two were representative of all the marchers.

So now they're all sorry and stuff that the war hasn't worked out quite like Wolfowitz, Feith and the rest of the administration ghouls promised it would. The question remains: WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO DIFFERENTLY?

Not a peep on that account.

[G_j]

18. "WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO DIFFERENTLY?"

that is what matters. I don't see any signs of real change.
These people still think they are in some kind of special annointed
class and refuse to understand they are supposed to be in service to the public, simply providing the truth.
According to Nuremberg principals the invasion of Iraq was illegal.
You still don't see this discussed either.

[kayell]

19. All a bunch of excuses

In the end the WP article concludes

" Whether a tougher approach by The Post and other news organizations would have slowed the rush to war is, at best, a matter of conjecture.

"People who were opposed to the war from the beginning and have been critical of the media's coverage in the period before the war have this belief that somehow the media should have crusaded against the war," Downie said. "They have the mistaken impression that somehow if the media's coverage had been different, there wouldn't have been a war."

So they are saying, gee, we could have done things better, but really, we didn't make any difference. The WP doesn't have the slightest bit of influence. :eyes:

And when has realistic, unbiased reporting that digs for all sides of the story and doesn't bury the important questions on page A18 been "crusading"? More cheneying loaded language. Just what I'd expect from what used to be a decent news source.

[G_j]

21. yep, had to put in a disclaimer n/t

[MisterP]

30. *sob* No one told us!

[G_j]

22. kick

[yardwork]

28. It makes me mad. Either they were stupid or they were bought

Either way, this weak wimpy apology with all kinds of disclaimers does nothing to redeem them in my eyes.

Let's start seeing some real reporting for a change. Then I'll listen to their pathetic excuses.

[librechik]

20. Impeach! er...Fire the bastids! um...Throw water balloons at the..,

uhhh

WTF can we do to stop these people NOW???!!

While they're doing it with TODAY"S stories???!!!


They don't care. They're internationals, not Americans.

[w4rma]

23. They're still doing it with everything related to Repugs. (nt)

[maxsolomon]

24. disingenuous apologia

they're trying to say they'll be 'unbiased' till november to sucker the suckers again.

[Skidmore]

25. It's more like they make and admission like this and turn

around and say, "I lied, so what."

[arwalden]

26. Their Turnaround In Policy Is JUST IN TIME For The Kerry Administration...

isn't that something? Who would have guessed?

-- Allen

[G_j]

27. "War? What War? "

War? What War? (August 12, 2004)

On May 26, 2004, the New York Times made a "mea culpa" about its reporting on the Iraq war and occupation, with other media outlets following suit. The admission of "questionable" reporting reflected not only on the New York Times, but more-so on other mainstream news outlets throughout the US. With no end to the occupation of Iraq in sight, has the media changed its reporting approach towards the war? (Salon.com)

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/media/2004/0812whatwar.htm
------------------------------

[rocktivity]

29. Funny how ALL the media came down with this "affliction" at the same time

"There was an attitude among editors: Look, we're going to war, why do we even worry about all this contrary stuff?" he added...said (Washington Post) ...Pentagon correspondent Thomas Ricks...

"Some of the Times's coverage in the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq was credulous; much of it was inappropriately italicized by lavish front-page display and heavy-breathing headlines," (New York Times)...Public Editor Daniel Okrent said at the...

An "attitude?" It was an absolute EPIDEMIC, but it wasn't caused by any germ that happening to be floating around. It was caused the Bush White House sending out media marching orders! The least they can do is be honest about THAT!

:headbang:
rocknation

[Career Prole]

31. Liz Spayd, the assistant managing editor for national news,

"says The Post's overall record was strong.

"I believe we pushed as hard or harder than anyone to question the administration's assertions on all kinds of subjects related to the war. . . . Do I wish we would have had more and pushed harder and deeper into questions of whether they possessed weapons of mass destruction? Absolutely," she said. "Do I feel we owe our readers an apology? I don't think so."
Wrong answer, Spayd...you owe tens of thousands of grieving parents, spouses, and children in several countries an apology.
You owe tens of thousands of maimed youngsters an apology.
You owe the next two or three generations of Americans who will be branded as warmongerers and murderers through no actions of their own an apology. (While you're with that group, you should apologize for sticking them with the bill for this debacle.)
You owe the peace movement an apology for letting them call us traitors and not giving us an opportunity to answer the charge.
You owe the world an apology.
Tell me Spayd, when you went to journalism school did anyone mention why it's so important that we have a free press?
I'll give you a small hint...the answer has nothing whatsoever to do with advertising dollars.