Paper regrets not mentioning reporter involved in question to Rumsfeld
What a crock of crap. Read this and tell me it’s not another example of the wimpy US media rolling over at the behest of the government. They are supposed to be serving the public and they are not. Now we hear that “some” media ethics “expert” says the question about armored vehicles was dishonest somehow. How? Who cares who was behind the question? I ask questions all the time that my wife suggests. Should she get credit? I think not. Can you imagine? “Sir, my wife wants to know if…” “Oh, and my daughter was wondering if…” Do you want to read how a question I asked was originally inspired by my high school civics teacher or a girlfriend from my formative years in the fifth grade? Who cares?!?! What is the point of unnecessary attribution except to water down everything. This administration has done a great job of NOT answering questions posed by professionals. So they take softballs from the public. This is just bypassing the bypass. How is this dishonest? Questions need to be asked.
The reporter, who should get praise for doing his job, will probably get a demotion and a black mark on his record. This is sickening to witness. The publisher, apparently a gonad-free wonder, should have told them to take a flying leap.
(CHATTANOOGA, Tenn.) – The publisher of a Tennessee newspaper says the paper should have told its readers that one of its own reporters helped frame a soldier’s complaint to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
Specialist Thomas Wilson expressed concerns that many military vehicles in Iraq aren’t properly armored.
A military affairs reporter for the Chattanooga “Times Free Press” who was embedded with troops in Iraq says he worked with guardsmen to put a question to Rumsfeld, after being told reporters couldn’t question the defense chief during his stop in Kuwait.
In a note to readers, published Friday, the paper’s publisher and executive editor says that information should have been included in Thursday’s story.
A media ethics expert says failing to include this information was “dishonest.”
Sometimes John can be awfully over the top, but on this one he’s absolutely-f______- on target. What the heck difference does is make who originally generated the question. The fact is that a huge percentage of dead soldiers in Iraq are dead because of lack of armor on their vehicles. And this from the most militarily advanced country in the world.
And of course the media spins the story so the average Joe believes it was wrong for the reporter to do this. It’s not until you sit and think about what the media just tried to feed you that you begin to question it. Sadly enough, most simply ingest what they’ve heard without first tasting it.
Moreover, it wasn’t like the question was out of the blue. As every report regarding the Q&A describes, the rest of the troops cheered when the question was asked. It was something that concerned all of them. It wasn’t some non sequitur that was completely irrelevant.
Another dumb controversy and the media rolls over again.
A Pentagon spokesman says it would be “unfortunate” if anyone interfered with the town hall meeting
Is that what the reporter did, interfere?
Did they make the question up completely, or was it a legitimate concern – which the troops might be afraid to ask, without encouragement?
The Oregonian (here in Oregon, of all places) has had several articles about the lack of armor on vehicles – because a large contingent of Guard troops from Oregon have been scrambling to retro-fit armor to their vehicles, and get the hard-plate inserts for flak-jackets.
But, any assertion that Guard troops are sucking hind-tit – when it comes to allocation of resources – seems to be downplayed by that “fight with the Army you have” crap, or treated as some kind of un-patriotic criticism during time of war.
You can be caught with your pants down, when you are the one being attacked. But we are the ones who started the war – why weren’t we better prepared before committing to hostilities?
I prefer Powell’s doctrine of going in with overwhelming force, to Rumsfield’s theory of using the minimum force.
Link at the top doesn’t show the story – wonder if it was yanked?
Putting the Dan Rathers et al to one side, the bottom line is that Rumsfeld, apparently trying to out-do McNamara from another era, may have been trying to fight this war on the cheap. Yes, the “media” may have been biased and all that, but thank God somebody blew the whistle. Our military deserves one helluva lot better than what they were getting. And shame on the cretins who didn’t push thru the paperwork to get the armored vehicles in place from the get-go.
It’s chickens**t editors who formulate and regulate the lousy state of journalism in this land. I mean, we invented muckraking, for cryin’ out loud.
I hadn’t realized the number of deserters from the US military had reached the phenomenal level they have — till, this afternoon, watching one of the stodgiest TV networks in the UK [ITV News on NWI]. There are 5,000 deserters. 5,000!
Did Rumsfeld answer any questions about that? Did he even get asked?
Rumsfeld and others at Defense have press conferences and get hostile questions all the time(if only Bush would do the same). The only reason this was a story was because the question came from a soldier. So essentially, the reporter was making news instead of reporting it.
When the military decided to “embed” reporters, apparently it’s only for positive reporting.
As a kid who grew up idealizing WWII, Ernie Pyle was the one and only embedded reporter. But he wasn’t just a shrill for the administration although still pretty tame by, let’s say, 70s journalism.
http://www.journalism.indiana.edu/news/erniepyle/
Yes..I redirected to another version of the same story…sigh.
By the way, the soldier who asked this question hasn’t had any experience in Iraq, as his unit is new there. The reporter had to scare him into the question. Still a good question, judging by the applause(and the answer), but having the reporter rig the whole thing including getting the guy selecting the questioners to point to his soldiers, is a little much.
Nice to see everyone realizes it doesn’t matter who prompted the soldier to ask the question, only the question matters.
Rummy and others never seem to get asked the real questions, nice to see someone asking them. Idiot Limbaugh whines on the radio about how reporters aren’t supposed to make news.
I thought the “buck stops here” and if so, why can’t Rumsfeld answer the tough questions.