|
COWARDICE IN JOURNALISM AWARD FOR NEWSWEEK
Goebbels Award for Condi
by Greg Palast
"It's appalling that this story got out there," Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice said on her way back from Iraq.
What's NOT appalling to Condi is that the US is holding prisoners at Guantanamo
under conditions termed "torture" by the Red Cross. What's not appalling to
Condi is that prisoners of the Afghan war are held in violation of international
law after that conflict has supposedly ended. What is NOT appalling to Condi is
that prisoner witnesses have reported several instances of the Koran's
desecration.
What is appalling to her is that these things were REPORTED. So to Condi goes to
the Joseph Goebbels Ministry of Propaganda Iron Cross.
But I don't want to leave out our President. His aides report that George Bush
is "angry" about the report -- not the desecration of the Koran, but the
REPORTING of it.
And so long as George is angry and Condi appalled, Newsweek knows what to do:
swiftly grab its corporate ankles and ask the White House for mercy.
But there was no mercy. Donald Rumsfeld pointed the finger at Newsweek and
said, "People lost their lives. People are dead." Maybe Rumsfeld was upset
that Newsweek was taking away his job. After all, it's hard to beat Rummy when
it comes to making people dead.
And just for the record: Newsweek, unlike Rumsfeld, did not kill anyone -- nor
did its report cause killings. Afghans protested when they heard the Koran
desecration story (as Christians have protested crucifix desecrations). The
Muslim demonstrators were gunned down by the Afghan military police -- who
operate under Rumsfeld's command.
Our Secretary of Defense, in his darkest Big Brother voice, added a warning for
journalists and citizens alike, "People need to be very careful about what they
say."
And Newsweek has now promised to be very, very good, and very, very careful not
to offend Rumsfeld, appall Condi or anger George.
For their good behavior, I'm giving Newsweek and its owner, the Washington Post,
this week's Yellow Streak Award for Craven Cowardice in Journalism.
As always, the competition is fierce, but Newsweek takes the honors by backing
down on Mike Isakoff's expose of cruelity, racism and just plain bone-headed
incompetence by the US military at the Guantanamo prison camp.
Isakoff cited a reliable source that among the neat little "interrogation"
techniques used to break down Muslim prisoners was putting a copy of the Koran
into a toilet.
In the old days, Isakoff's discovery would have led to Congressional
investigations of the perpetrators of such official offence. The Koran-flushers
would have been flushed from the military, panels would have been impaneled and
Isakoff would have collected his Pulitzer.
No more. Instead of nailing the wrong-doers, the Bush Administration went after
the guy who REPORTED the crime, Isakoff.
Was there a problem with the story? Certainly. If you want to split hairs, the
inside-government source of the Koran desecration story now says he can't
confirm which military report it appeared in. But he saw it in one report and a
witnesses has confirmed that the Koran was defiled.
Of course, there's an easy way to get at the truth. RELEASE THE REPORTS NOW.
Hand them over, Mr. Rumsfeld, and let's see for ourselves what's in them.
But Newsweek and the Post are too polite to ask Rumsfeld to make the
investigative reports public. Rather, the corporate babysitter for Newsweek,
editor Mark Whitaker, said, "Top administration officials have promised to
continue looking into the charges and so will we." In other words, we'll take
the Bush Administration's word that there is no evidence of Koran-dunking in the
draft reports on Guantanamo.
It used to be that the Washington Post permitted journalism in its newsrooms. No
more. But, frankly, that's an old story.
Every time I say investigative reporting is dead or barely breathing in the USA,
some little smartass will challenge me, "What about Watergate? Huh?" Hey,
buddy, the Watergate investigation was 32 years ago -- that means it's been
nearly a third of a century since the Washington Post has printed a big
investigative scoop.
The Post today would never run the Watergate story: a hidden source versus
official denial. Let's face it, Bob Woodward, now managing editor at the Post,
has gone from "All the President's Men" to becoming the President's Man -- "Bush
at War." Ugh!
And now the Post company is considering further restrictions on the use of
confidential sources -- no more "Deep Throats."
Despite its supposed new concern for hidden sources, let's note that Newsweek
and the Post have no trouble providing, even in the midst of this story, cover
for secret Administration sources that are FAVORABLE to Bush. Editor
Whitaker's retraction relies on "Administration officials" whose names he kindly
withholds.
In other words, unnamed sources are OK if they defend Bush, unacceptable if they
expose the Administration's mendacity or evil.
A lot of my readers don't like the Koran-story reporter Mike Isakoff because of
his goofy fixation with Monica Lewinsky and Mr. Clinton's cigar. Have some
sympathy for Isakoff: Mike's one darn good reporter, but as an inmate at the
Post/Newsweek facilities, his ability to send out serious communications to the
rest of the world are limited.
A few years ago, while I was tracking the influence of the power industry on
Washington, Isakoff gave me some hard, hot stuff on Bill Clinton -- not the
cheap intern-under-the-desk gossip -- but an FBI report for me to publish in The
Guardian of Britain.
I asked Isakoff why he didn't put it in Newsweek or in the Post.
He said, when it comes to issues of substance, "No one gives a sh--," not the
readers, and especially not the editors who assume that their US target audience
is small-minded, ignorant and wants to stay that way.
That doesn't leave a lot of time, money or courage for real reporting. And woe
to those who practice investigative journalism. As with CBS's retraction of Dan
Rather's report on Bush's draft-dodging, Newsweek's diving to the mat on
Guantanamo acts as a warning to all journalists who step out of line.
Newsweek has now publicly committed to having its reports vetted by Rumsfeld's
Defense Department before publication. Why not just print Rumsfeld's press
releases and eliminate the middleman, the reporter?
However, not all of us poor scribblers will adhere to this New News Order. In
the meantime, however, for my future security and comfort, I'm having myself
measured for a custom-made orange suit.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(989 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
