Newsweek Debacle

[Proletariat]

Nice one.

Newsweek admits that they screwed up the story where they claimed US interregators have flushed copies of the Quaran at Gitmo.

Oopsies.

Great reporting which so far has directly lead to more than a dozen deaths, and indirectly to countless more, and has inflamed the entire region, threatening to remove all progress that has been made diplomatically in recent years.

Of course no doubt 95% of the people who have seen their hatred of the US inflamed by this story will never see the retraction.

Not only should people be fired for this mistake, people should be prosecuted.

[Fragony]

I hope it is a fluke, because I would be pretty angry if it wasn't. How to win 'hearts and minds' by tearing down their most fundamental values, stupid stupid stupid. How could they do such a thing.

Anyway, true or not, it is a bit late now.

[Hurin_Rules]

I've already got a thread on this:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=47670

[Goofball]

Nice one.

Newsweek admits that they screwed up the story where they claimed US interregators have flushed copies of the Quaran at Gitmo.

Oopsies.

Great reporting which so far has directly lead to more than a dozen deaths, and indirectly to countless more, and has inflamed the entire region, threatening to remove all progress that has been made diplomatically in recent years.

Of course no doubt 95% of the people who have seen their hatred of the US inflamed by this story will never see the retraction.

Not only should people be fired for this mistake, people should be prosecuted.

I think we all need to back up a minute here. The recent events in no way mean that the alleged Quran desecration didn't take place, only that we are less sure of it. First, let's look at the reason that Newsweek is back-pedalling:

Whitaker added that the magazine's original source later said he could not be sure he read about the alleged Quran incident in the report Newsweek cited, and that it might have been in another document.

It is important to note that the source has not said that he never actually read in a report that the Quran was desecrated, only that it may have been in a different report than he originally thought.

This article also says:

Whitaker wrote that the magazine's information came from "a knowledgeable U.S. government source," and writers Michael Isikoff and John Barry had sought comment from two Defense Department officials. One declined to respond, and the other challenged another part of the story but did not dispute the Quran charge, Whitaker said.

Now, I agree that that certainly is not strong enough corroboration, and that Newsweek should have dug much deeper before printing what they did.

Having said that, I am inclined to believe that the Quran flushing actually did take place. Why do I believe this? Because I have already read dozens of accounts of abuse at Gitmo and Abu Gareib. I have seen pictures of detainees being forced into mock sexual acts with each other and being forced to wear panties on their heads.

When a system that has already been shown to allow (even condone) that type of treatment, then flushing a Quran down the crapper is not such a stretch for me to believe.

Quite frankly, the U.S. military's overblown indignation about how they have been so hard done by by this Newsweek article is a joke. If they had had their house in better order, then the world would not be so inclined to accept articles like this at face value. Unfortunately, they have made their own public relations bed, and are now being forced to lie in it.

[PanzerJaeger]

LoL its the military's fault Newsweek put out an unsubstantiated report?

No, im afraid thats a lame attempt at passing the buck.

Newsweek has followed in the steps of CBS and put their political agenda over reality and now people are dead. That might work for politicians but not for a supposed objective news source.

This whole incident is disgusting. When did the media change from wanting to report the news objectively to feeling it was necessary to subvert the government in a time of war? Vietnam? I know this kind of crap wouldnt have happened during WW2.

It really says something about liberal bias, subjective news, opionated journalism or whatever you want to call it when an American news outlet gets an ubsubstantiated report that sheds negative light on the military and decides to print it anyway. They didnt check up on thier story because they wanted it to be true... just like Mr. Rather. Pathetic and subversive.

[Goofball]

LoL its the military's fault Newsweek put out an unsubstantiated report?

Sorry, but where in my post did I say that?

Go set up your straw men somewhere else.

[Redleg]

Sorry, but where in my post did I say that?

Go set up your straw men somewhere else.

Probably from this statement of your's Goofball

Quite frankly, the U.S. military's overblown indignation about how they have been so hard done by by this Newsweek article is a joke. If they had had their house in better order, then the world would not be so inclined to accept articles like this at face value. Unfortunately, they have made their own public relations bed, and are now being forced to lie in it.

When a news agency does slopply reporting in order to get a scoop ahead of the rest of the world's news media - it often leads to problems. Your comment here shows how well some will buy the position that its the past wrong doing of the subject of the story who is at fault - and not slopply journalism on the journalists part.

Frankly what is disrupting about your comment is that you want the United States Military to be fully responsible for its wrong doings (which I agree with) but are unwilling to hold the media fully responsible for its wrong doing.

Regardless if the allegation is correct or not - the way the story was done in its content was not correct - nor was proper and ethical journalism on the the part of Newsweek followed. However it seems you rather hold Newsweek to a different standard.

[Goofball]

LoL its the military's fault Newsweek put out an unsubstantiated report?

Sorry, but where in my post did I say that?

Probably from this statement of your's Goofball

Quite frankly, the U.S. military's overblown indignation about how they have been so hard done by by this Newsweek article is a joke. If they had had their house in better order, then the world would not be so inclined to accept articles like this at face value. Unfortunately, they have made their own public relations bed, and are now being forced to lie in it.

Both you and Panzer need to pay a little better attention to what people are actually saying Red.

I never said, or even implied that the U.S. military is responsible for the sloppy journalism of Newsweek. Nor am I excusing Newsweek. Apparently both of you missed this part of my first post, so here it is again:

Now, I agree that that certainly is not strong enough corroboration, and that Newsweek should have dug much deeper before printing what they did.

The point of my post is that the U.S. military has a very poor record of late when it comes to the treatment of prisoners, and because of that stories like this one, whether they are true or not end up having the effect of nuclear explosions instead of farts in a duststorm.

An analogy:

If careless passerby flicks a cigarette butt on your driveway and it bursts into flame and burns your house down because you spilled an entire can of gasoline when filling your lawnmower and didn't clean up the spill, then yes, the cigarette flicker is clearly at fault and should be held accountable for starting the fire. However, your life would have been a whole lot easier if you had just cleaned up the gas spill rather than letting it sit.

If the U.S. military didn't have such a poor track record when it came to the treatment of (prisoners (particularly muslim prisoners), then its metaphorical house wouldn't burn down every time some careless writer flicked the equivilant of a journalistic cigarette butt.

[PanzerJaeger]

Unfortunately, they have made their own public relations bed, and are now being forced to lie in it.

How is the US military's "public relations bed" at fault for a news story that is printed and cannot be substantiated? Its kind of hard to have good public relations when the media simply make things up about you..

Your whole assertion that in fact the military is to blame for this debacle because of previous public relations issues is apologist.

Its no ones fault but Newsweek's if they print a story that cannot be proven or even substantiated and it causes problems.

My how our standards have changed havent they? Consider your opinion in comparison to your Iraq War stance.. You and President Bush seem to have the same thought process when it comes to believing what you want to believe.

[Steppe Merc]

Well this is sad... damn bad journalists. Wonder if it was on purpose, was a mistake, or some journalist just made up a story... Did they give an official reason? Because sometimes journalists just make up shit... or it could be a conspiracy, which is certaintly possible.

[PanzerJaeger]

Well this afternoon they retracted the story.

Screwing up a story isnt what bothers me about this, its the conscious or subconscious thought process behind it.

How are we as a country supposed to be successful in the middle east with a media that, time and time again, chooses to print stories that are so anti-american?

Since when did it become our media's job to give our enemies fodder to use against us?

They need to understand that making up stories about Bush is one thing, but American and Middle Eastern lives are at stake now. They need to put aside their petty hatred of Bush and act in a more responsible manner.


In any event, these shenanigans go a long way to explain why FOXNews is wiping the floor with the other networks in the ratings..

[Ser Clegane]

Of course no doubt 95% of the people who have seen their hatred of the US inflamed by this story will never see the retraction.

This is usually the case - but this time it seems that the whole thing is getting quite some airtime - it even was mentioned in the major TV news here in Germany which surprised me a bit.

[Proletariat]

This is usually the case - but this time it seems that the whole thing is getting quite some airtime - it even was mentioned in the major TV news here in Germany which surprised me a bit.

And now they don't even believe it. Sheesh.

[Ser Clegane]

And now they don't even believe it. Sheesh.

I believe that I do not quite understand what you are trying to tell me (seriously ... not trying to mock you...).

[Proletariat]

Well, they're saying the retraction is a White House cover-up.

[Proletariat]

Bad journalism is bad journalism.

Any journalistic enterprise that can get played by two different antagonists over the same issue (first by Islamist radicals who seek destabilization, second by the White House) is not really serious. (Still shocked Adrian fully backs them on this.)

From where I stand, I don't know whether the formula for anonymous sources need to be tweaked or not. But I do believe that editorship in journalism today is embarassingly sloppy.

From CBS News to the NYT to Newsweek, the energy that has driven journalism has been a bottom line that promoted controversy toward more notoriety and sales. That energy has ridden on the coattails of public trust, and after a while the free ride must end.

It does not end with bias, which is where the debators usually think it does. Bias is okay, except in the absence of integrity and accountability. I find very little cross checking on the part of writers. I find that much of the press amounts to gossip and salacious 'inside sources.' It is so obvious that the mainstream wants what Drudge has had -- if Drudge had the item about the Koran, would anyone have really noticed?

No, because Drudge hasn't ever really sold itself as a source edited for content. That is part of its shtick. But the mainstream guys? People are supposed to believe what is in these newscasts and publications.

The editors are in effect serving two masters. The more the mainstream tries to add edge to attract a dwindling audience, the more they get away from the people who tuned out to begin with, and the more open it leaves itself to attacks on its pretense of integrity. It is a sad stupid joke, and Newsweek is sitting atop the pinnacle right now because they couldn't even figure out how they wanted to tell the story of the Koran being flushed down the toilet. Nobody paid attention to ascribing any meaning to this story, and left it to politically motivated other entities to do it for them. Journalism in general has been trying to foist off responsibility for its content, and I am glad to see people and organizations screwed for it.


As for the ensuing murders, well. What can I say? It's infreakingsane.

There's more outrage in the Muslim world over these (which turned out to be false) allegations regarding the Koran then there was over Arabs butchering and oppressing Arabs for the decades.

I respect people of Faith, Muslims included. I have a hard time working up much concern for morons.

[Ser Clegane]

Well, they're saying the retraction is a White House cover-up.

That's certainly not what they were saying in the news I was watching here this morning (and it would be quite inappropriate to offer such an interpretation on the news)