And the right wing of the blogosphere has yet another front in the never-ending war on the media:
You’ve probably not read much about it because only a handful of mainstream media outlets have covered it, but the Associated Press – for decades America’s largest and most trusted wire news service – is at the center of a credibility crisis largely of its own making.
You probably have heard of the AP story that started it – a horrifying dispatch from Iraq the day after Thanksgiving claiming that six Sunnis had been doused with kerosene as they left their mosque following Friday prayers and burned alive by Shiite-aligned militiamen.
The story, which was quickly picked up by virtually every major news organization in the world, also claimed that “the Shiite-dominated police and Iraqi military” stood by doing nothing as the six people were gruesomely murdered. The story was sourced to “police Captain Jamil Hussein.”
The problem is there appears to be no such person as Captain Jamil Hussein, at least not who is employed by the Iraqi police. The U.S. military says Hussein doesn’t exist and has demanded that AP issue a correction. The Iraqi government says no such person is on its police payroll.
Things have gotten progressively worse for AP since those initial questions about “Hussein” were raised by U.S. and Iraqi officials. A firestorm of criticism has exploded in the Blogosphere as bloggers have researched the names of more than a dozen Iraqi- named sources of apparently doubtful credibility that have appeared in AP stories.
The suggestion among many of the bloggers is that AP is being had by Iraqis aligned with the insurgency who are posing as credible sources and are using the world’s most respected wire news service to project to the world a flawed image of the conflict in Iraq.
And so it goes. The usual suspects are in a tizzy, and looking at the memeorandum archives shows this has been playing out for a few days. No doubt, by the time we are done with this story, AP will be forced to offer an embarassing apology, and we can all listen to Bill O’Reilly and Red State tell us that this proves the media hates America.
I don’t know if the AP blew it- it sure looks like they got this wrong (from this Examiner piece), and they probably handled it poorly. But I don’t really care, either, because the past few years have made me cynical and petty and extremely wary of those attacking the media. If this were just about this one story, and the forces of patriotism on the right were aligned to attack the AP to get this one story right, it would be one thing. But that isn’t the objective.
The objective is to destroy the credibility of the Amurica-hating ‘mainstream media’ completely, and to replace it with party organs. Instead of realizing that a large organization with thousands of employees and hundreds of thousands may have mistakenly trusted a source who lied or was wrong, we will be bombarded with weeks of messages that this is just more ‘proof’ that the media is on the side of the terrorists and that really, the only people you can believe are those who have exposed this evil that is AP.
And that is what it is all about- smacking down the media and the media elites so that they are not trusted, and we can get the unvarnished truth from outsiders and self-styled truth detectors like Bill O’Reilly. The forces who want you to think that abortion causes cancer and that Terri Schiavo was about to go for a walk and that global warming is a fraud and that gay marriage is the greatest threat to civilization have an axe grind, and if they can delegitimize the media to further their own aims, they will. And that is precisely what they are doing.
In essence, the battle here is between the thousands of members of the media who go out every day and place themselves in dangerous situations to bring hard facts home to us but who sometimes get shit wrong, and those who think that reporting is repeating whatever the Ken Mehlman/Karl Rove press release of the day might say. So excuse me if I cut the media a little slack. I have watched these attacks for years now, and at the embarassing beginning of this blog was a full-throated participant in the attacks, but I am to the point now that I am willing to give the people trying to get the truth out more of a break than the people I know are pushing an agenda.
Because, as we all know, if it were not for media reporting, everything would be going ok in Iraq.
Steve
I don’t get the impression that the AP got this one wrong. They say the police captain has been a regular source for years and that they’ve often visited with him in his office at the police headquarters. My guess is, given how naming conventions work in that part of the world, his official name for Iraqi government purposes is probably something different from “Jamil Hussein,” and that seems like the simplest explanation.
Our military apparatus is not really focused on the dissemination of truth during wartime, nor do I expect that to be their priority, really. When CENTCOM says that so-and-so is not a reliable source, I don’t assume they’re necessarily telling the truth or not. Didn’t we learn from Ahmed Chalabi and Curveball that our government’s definition of a “reliable source” is basically anyone who tells you what you want to hear?
demimondian
The problem here is that Examiner.com is deliberately leaving out a key piece of evidence: that the AP responded to these allegations already.
Chuck Butcher
What we seem to have here is AP and its sources on one side of the credibility dispute and the Iraqi govt. and the US military on the other. That ought to produce a rather large “Hmmm.” Does ANYBODY hand the Iraqi govt. a win in a credibility dispute? Then there’s the US military with its “in house” propaganda contractor to consider and its record regarding things like “friendly fire”, WMDs, winning, etc. I would propose that these particular entities have obvious and strong agendas in the presentation of “facts.” AP on the other hand would seem to have some reason to get facts correct since their business depends on credibility, not on political aganda.
The obvious problem is that this sort of calculation has to be performed in the absence of facts regarding the current dust-up, so it devolves into a assumptions based on previous performance. In that calculus AP is the clear winner.
Once the issue is placed in the context of political agendas it gets really sticky, because then it bcomes a matter of trying to make the “facts” fit desires and they may just refuse. Sorry Red-ites, Iraq stinks and no matter what you try to do to facts they just won’t fit a different picture, they stink.
Sirkowski
Liberal liars, NOBODY EVER DIES IN IRAQ!!!!!1111111
chopper
dunno, the AP is strongly standing behind it. a lot of people in the mid east have a different informal name, see abbas for example, and it’s not like the iraqi government wants to agree if the story is true. it makes them look really bad.
if indeed the AP messed this one up, they messed it up and screw them. of course, it is funny that people would point to this sort of thing as evidence that the media wants to make iraq look terrible. it is terrible. one story doesn’t change that.
ThymeZone
We’re missing the point.
Demonization of everything that involves a process, such as science, journalism, law, justice ….. is required in the New Right.
If process wins, the New Right loses, because it is all based on emotions. Feelings. Faith. Convictions.
Thus process, which includes probably the least apt example of process we have, which is the media, must be continually demonized in order to prop up the Large Facade of Bullshit.
Process-hater will point out that imperfect process can also produce bullshit. But the difference is, with process, you have an opportunity to find the truth. With bullshit, the only thing you are going to find is more bullshit.
Blue Neponset
The MSM bashers on the Right are overplaying their hand on this one. The AP has responded to their critisism and still stands by its story.
Jake
Hey, if they want to bring up the whole “Curveball” thing again…
Oh, that’s why it’s so hot in here. That firestorm raging through the Blogosphere (ie Michelle Malkin and friends).
Wow, some guy sitting in his mom’s basement in Toledo patched into the Iraqi Census Bureau and found…Hmmm. The “bloggers” don’t seem to have found anything. I guess we’re supposed to see they did research and assume they revealed a damning truth? Maybe if we were slightly less alert than the average Ditto Head.
The suggestion among many golf enthusiasts.
The suggestion among many beer bottle collectors.
The suggestion among many crack-heads.
Who the devil cares? “Me an’ a buncha my friends think,” doesn’t get you a pony.
I don’t see this rising to the level of war. I don’t see it rising beyond a brilliant example of what tabloid writing looks like. I especially love the way the writer comes down on the AP for making stuff up (several days after the issue has been resolved), and then engages in a stunningly flagrant display of deceptive writing. I wonder if the whole problem stemmed from the fact that the source’s name is Hussein?
ThymeZone
At this point, does anyone have a feel for whether Right Blogovia actually has any citizens left except for crazy people?
In other words, is there even a coherent and viable “right” out there at all, at this point?
scarshapedstar
So about that PJ media tag, John…
jhupp
Sorry, but Michael Novak has this beat by a mile. Seriously, when a Catholic “theologian” writes a column on the American media’s anti-American wartime propaganda from the perspective of an Islamic terrorist, shouldn’t he just retire? I mean, how can this not be the apex of his career? (Please read it. You will be either deeply frightened or deeply amused.)
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/991gvxyi.asp
Shinobi
I think it is worthwhile to criticize the media, in the same way I think it is worthwhile to criticize the government. The AP particularly is a large organization and it is very difficult to impose economic punishments on them when they screw up.
When there are consistant failures in their ability to operate effectively they need to be held accoutable, just like the Bush Administration. And this isntance, combined with the issues during the lebanon israel conflict bring some interesting questions to mind about how they handle their news gathering in the mid east.
As a statistician who has to watch numbers mangled on a daily basis there is no love lsot between me and journalists. I think they need to be pushed to do their jobs better, because people around the world are relying on them for information.
But anyone who spouts about liberal bias clearly has a different agenda. It’s not about being biased, it’s about them getting the facts straight and reporting just the facts. And that is a standard we can and should hold the media to. (Fox news included)
Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop
Fake reporters but possibly maybe semi-accurate stories — the New Journalism. Makes you proud, eh?
If that’s true, then why should anyone care what you think about this topic? If you “really don’t care” about the truth, you’re just a dishonest nut, and the blogosphere’s already full of those.
Zifnab
But… but… I really want a pony.
Also, the blaring and blatant double standard of the right-wing whine-mobile that can tout Santorum’s claims of long-lost WMDs, robustly (and wrongly) defend the accuracy of “The Path to 9/11” in the face of a former President, prop up opinions from people that don’t exist:
or as recently as yesterday declare that if a Defense Secretary suggests withdrawl in Iraq in private then he’s doing his job but if a sitting Democratic Congressman suggests the same thing he’s a cut-and-run traitor
I mean, these people have such little room to talk that its laughable. But please, go ahead and villify the AP. Because otherwise the terrorists win.
John Cole
Of course I wish for accuracy, but this is justa blip, a distraction, another “look a rabbit.”
Tsulagi
Yep, if only the happy news were reported Iraq and the administration’s finely crafted ME policy would be shown to be a brilliant success merely hidden by the all-powerful, hate-America MSM. Annie and Michelle say so.
Hey, how about your “usual suspects” proving it to the naysayers? Simple to do. Bill O., Hannity, Geraldo, and the rest of the Fox News truthsayers could stroll through Sadr City and Ramadi doing live man-in-the-street interviews. Poll those inside mosques for Bush’s approval rating and let them express their heartfelt appreciation on camera directly to the president. He’s said he doesn’t get enough of that. We could finally get the truth.
I’d watch that. Shit, might even go get the big-screen HD TV I covet just so I could clearly see Bill O. stride up to the guys with AKs in the pickups to call them pinheads in Arabic. Hannity and Annie providing backup. Comedy gold.
capelza
As many above me have stated…the AP responded strongly days ago.
Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop
Oh, yeah, they “responded” so everything’s OK. Nothing to see here. Not hardly. They still haven’t they produced any evidence of this “Captain Hussein.” They can’t explain why the streets are so quiet about these horrific murders.
As NYT reporter Ed Wong noted:
Andrew J. Lazarus
Note: embarrass has two rs. I won a spelling bee on that one, back in the Johnson Administration.
I have an idea why there isn’t any clamor in the Iraqi streets over this. Namely, it isn’t so much worse than any other day, by their standards.
Tsulagi
And if this AP story is incorrect, that has what net effect upon the circumstances in Iraq? That there really isn’t civil war (sectarian strife for the squeamish) underway in Iraq? That there was no reason for Gates during a confirmation hearing this morning to say we’re not winning in Iraq? That 3 ½ + years of beyond brain dead Republican civilian leadership has brought us to this point in Iraq?
So yeah, the real continued focus for everyone should be on the validity of this one AP story. None of that other minor stuff matters.
Mike S
That is exactly what they want. I had an argument wit a rabid Republican friend of mine about this very issue after Katrina. He had sent me a Newsmax article as proof of how biassed the media was.
This part hadn’t even phazed him.
According to the wingers established facts don’t matter. It is not a reporters job to refute falsehoods but instead they should just “agree to dissagree.”
Mike S
Sorry, forgot the link.
ImJohnGalt
John, I don’t think we can ever say enough how remarkable your transformation has been over the last few years. It’s a rare person who takes any time at all to critically examine their own values and beliefs. It takes an even rarer individual who, upon discovering a discordance between their principles and the results of that soul searching, uses what he or she learns to radically change their behaviour.
Just wanted to say thanks again for this blog.
Zifnab
Well, if the gentle Governor just “thinks” its a Cat 1 Storm, then I guess it was just a silly disagreement after all. It’s not like a storm catagorization has any scientifically verifiably standards or requirements.
“No one could have anticipated the breach of the levees” and “Iraq isn’t a Civil War”. Quotes that will mark this party’s place in history.
The Other Steve
I think it’s funny that the right is attacking journalists for spreading a story with dubious sourcing, considering the right’s entire Modus Operandi for several decades has been to spread lies as truth.
Although, honestly, I don’t know what this specific story(people burned alive) has to do with anything. How would this benefit anybody? Or hurt anybody? I mean are they claiming Iraq is not violent, and the absense of this story proves it?
chopper
don’t remember seeing you get in a tizzy over the utter inaccuracy of all the media stories about WMDs that pushed americans into supporting war with iraq.
i guess ‘accuracy in reporting’ only goes one way.
personally, i’m with john here; if indeed this is a bunk story, it sucks, but it hardly goes against the facts on the ground in iraq. it’s one sh1t story out of thousands which all show a decline into civil war.
chopper
the saffir-simpson scale has a known liberal bias.
SeesThroughIt
No, they are claiming that if the AP got any aspect of this story wrong, then it is never, ever to be trusted as this demonstrates collusion between the media in Iraq and the islammyfacists. I wish I were being spoofy there, but I’m not. Sad, isn’t it?
Back in January, Stephen Colbert absolutely nailed it in an interview:
Zifnab
Yes. It’s basic chip-the-foundation strategy. If they can discredit this story successfully, the next time the AP reports an attrocity in Iraq they will more ground to call fraud or foul. Eventually, the goal is to roll us back to the 90s, when right-wing pundits were believable. The endgame in this strategy is to declare that everything is fine in Iraq. If a prominent source disputes the claim, the pundits point to past “revelations” of misinformation, suggests that the source is lying, and demands that said source should be ignored.
Take a look at the Lancet study claiming 400,000-700,000 casualties since the beginning of the war. The general reactions from the right range from “inaccurate” to “exaggeration” to “they’re just putting out propoganda for the enemy!”
TenguPhule
John, some things to consider:
1. Giving your real name in print in Iraq is asking for a Death Squad to visit you, your family and friends. Hussein is almost certainly an alias.
2. Neither the US military or the Iraqi government can account for almost half of the people on the payroll in the first place.
Tsulagi
Yeah, I liked that one. Especially after a video surfaced months later of a government video conference including FEMA and Bush. At one point a guy on camera is pointing to a map saying the levees could break causing a greater disaster.
After the video aired, the Baghdad Bob truthsayers of the admin put it in proper perspective. “He didn’t say the levees would break, just that they could.” And “The president was there to provide support during the conference rather than direction.” Guess he was falling back on his preppy school cheerleader ways to provide leadership.
Tsulagi
Reading that he really did nail it. Yep, the retardocons want no challenge to their truthiness authority.
With Bush, I’m not convinced he knows when he’s lying. Of course he doesn’t care one way or the other, but maybe he is so retarded he thinks anything that randomly tumbles out of his mouth goes through a magical Jesus spin cycle transforming it into truth. He is that much of a spoiled brat. Maybe thinks of himself as pope of the US rather than president.
neil
When I heard about this I thought, “_Now_ they care about accuracy?”
Jake
I’m sure the freedom-loving, Democracy-exporting American men and women who are frothing mad over the AP story will be happy with Iraq’s solution.
Government-controlled media aside, what a fine example of prioritizing. Let’s see, we live in fear we’ll be snatched from our homes or shot as we go to work; we can’t think for all of the bombs going off and there is so much death the morgues are over flowing. What should we do?
I know, we’ll form a group to monitor the news for mistakes! And then we’ll waste time investigating these mistakes! Yeah, that makes a shit load of sense!
They must have caught some sort of idiot-itis from the US Admin.
skip
The same MSM reported that Iranian soldiers were found in Lebanon— a “revelation” that led nowhere, but served necon interests very well as the US was letting the IDF rampage.
No complaints about that, eh? Not even a retraction.
skip
Oh yeah, I forgot about the Nuke Sub spy caught about the same time. Israel was briefly alluded to, then the story just vanished.
Till today–when he was briefly referred to as spying for a “foreign power.” The rightie blogs seem oddly uninterested in that. Wonder why?
Pb
John Cole,
I don’t know of anyone who has independently confirmed anything here, so at this point, it’s basically the AP’s word against “The Examiner”. Given the track record of wingnut bloggers and their many other faith-based predictions, I’m going to go with the AP for now, although of course I’ve had problems with their reporting before (reporting which wingnuts love, incidentally… John Solomon, anyone?). Much more here:
peter riggs
A valuable post, John. And the excerpt from Colbert is a great addition, and one that I haven’t run across before.
It ties in very well with John Dean’s thesis in “Conservatives without Conscience,” exploring the nature of the authoritarian personality and its tendency to be attracted to (or to become) right wing leaders. But it also ties in very well with the evangelical/fundamentalist mindset: there is only one true book, and one God. The possibility that someone might follow another book, or another God (or none), or might get their news from a source other than Tony Snowjob, is deeply threatening.
It also explains why there’s such a complete disconnect between right wing critics of the press and its defenders (not that I’m a great fan of the way the press has discharged its duties during the Bush administration). For press defenders, the press has an obligation to question the government’s version of reality; for right wing critics, any questioning of the government’s version is tantamount to heresy, and must be suppressed at all costs. And the existential need to attack the media’s questioning of the government is only heightened when it appears that there may be some merit to the press’s version.
It may also shed some light on why liberals/Democrats are essentially handicapped when the press savages Democrats (as they did with Clinton and Gore, e.g.): no matter how unfair or obnoxious the coverage, they are restrained by the belief that the press is supposed to question authority. The right has no such restraints. Thus, liberals may condemn right wing attacks as biased, unfair, trivial, etc., but they’re never going to be comfortable charging the press with treason, and calling for executions. It’s tough to compete with the right under those circumstances, and the press quite naturally is more intimidated by right wing attacks (even if, and to some extent particularly if, the press is predominantly liberal itself).
Interesting stuff –
Paul L.
For those who believe that the media tilts Right-wing and is in the pockets of corporations, they do seem eager to jump to defend them now.
And what a great response, we stand by the story, how you dare question us and you do not deserve any concrete proof.
And quietly change the story from four mosques to one.
Can I pull that with Qana which you always bring up demimondian?
60 Billion Minutes
John’s media complaint reminds of the feminist nitwit (Linda Alcoff) in the media Duke lacrosse rape case debate, the truth and facts about the player’s innocence does not matter, what is important is the narrative.
Zifnab
That’s facinating Paul L.
Now go back to listening to Rush Limbaugh, who handled the Duke case with such elegance:
Or perhaps you prefer the Bill “Let’s blame the victim” O’Rielly narative:
Thank god we have these bastions of journalistic integrety to protect us and set a good example.
Zifnab
Seriously, before we go hacking any MSM organ off at the knees, let’s find our model. Who or what is the modern TV/Newspaper/Radio company supposed to model themselves after?
I think NPR and PBS do a great job of gathering and reporting the facts without loading down the show with opinion and hype. Likewise, (and you can laugh if you want) the Daily Show does an amazing job in its interviews. John Stewart in particular is at his peak when he’s sitting eye to eye with the President of Pakistan or the latest candidate for Senate. He sticks to the facts, asks the hard questions, asks the hard follow-ups, and does it all with charm.
CNN doesn’t mind getting its hands dirty, and does a great job of getting people into the field. 60 Minutes is a model for the documentary, scoring the big interviews often on-site. Honestly, I enjoy the AP’s decentralized business model and freelance approach.
There, those are my models, my standards of journalistic integrity. Match’m or beat’m. But don’t go shitting on a news agency because it doesn’t meet your nebulous definition of “good journalism”.
Paul L.
Zifnab and for your side I give you
The Duke 88, Nancy Grace and Duke senior Shadee Malaklou
Hag of the Hoax Nomination: Nancy Grace
Like Teacher, Like Student: Duke Student. Shadee Malaklou Offers Her View.
demimondian
Yo, Paul L.! Are you going to show any falsifiable evidence about the “fake bodies” in Qana?
You know, by like, going and investigating?
John S.
I love how Paul L. lovingly links to Confederate Yankee in nearly all his screeds. I mean, that guy is one hell of a journalist!
Keep speaking truth to power, Paul.
Zifnab
I don’t know who the hell said that Nancy Grace was on my side, but please punch him in the face for me.
Tsulagi
Off topic, but if it’s already on Qana and Nancy Grace, what the hell?
I remember there was a post a little while back about indestructible weed in Afghanistan. Here’s a photo or two of some a sailor in AF stumbled across.
chopper
here’s a mutant afghani plant that’s the size of a frickin’ house.
SeesThroughIt
Fucking hell! I’ve heard of weed being called “christmas tree” before, but that’s not because the plant actually resembled one.
Krista
Holy crap. Just cultivate it, build up piles all over the country and spark it all up during a brisk wind. Fighting’s over, boys and girls. (As long as we keep everybody stocked with Cheetos…)
demimondian
Hmm. Krista, you might want to keep track of the valiant National Guard soldiers from the 51st State in Afghanistan…
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15239501/
DougJ
What about all the Sunnis who weren’t doused with kerosene and set on fire? Isn’t it a turning point of sorts that they only set six Sunnis on fire? At least 6 Sunnis would be burned alive on a typical day in Detroit or Philadelphia. And what about all the Sunnis that Clinton burned alive during Socksgate?
demimondian
Exactly, DougJ! You’ve got the right spirit — the real crime here isn’t that the AP is making up the immolated Sunnis, but that it’s suppressing the fact that the Shia death squads got away to safety, without reprisals.
Pb
Sounds to me like Nancy Grace is on the Bush administration’s side…
Sherard
Hey, way to go out on a limb there, John. The AP does not appear to even be TRYING to get the story in Iraq right. Good job turning this into a “Right wing war on the media”. I’d say that is about as brilliant as the alleged “War on Christmas” you like to make fun of. I’m sure the irony is lost on you.
demimondian
There. That’s what you meant, and it’s clearer that way.
Barry
peter riggs Says:
“It also explains why there’s such a complete disconnect between right wing critics of the press and its defenders (not that I’m a great fan of the way the press has discharged its duties during the Bush administration). For press defenders, the press has an obligation to question the government’s version of reality; for right wing critics, any questioning of the government’s version is tantamount to heresy, and must be suppressed at all costs. And the existential need to attack the media’s questioning of the government is only heightened when it appears that there may be some merit to the press’s version.”
Not quite true; during the 1990’s it was hard to find a right-winger who wasn’t totally accepting of media attacks on the US government. Remember the saying, ‘I love my country but fear my government’?
Joe Yowsa
My guess is “Capt. Jamil Hussein” will be retiring now and the AP liars will come up with a new “source” in a couple of weeks. ;-) … Well, the “fellow” was as prolific as hell, eh? ;-)