Monday, May 16, 2005

Oh this is rich!

Riots spread across Afghanistan and Pakistan last week, incited by a Newsweek story reporting on alleged Qur'an desecration at Guatanamo Bay. But guess what? Now they are saying they might have been wrong about it. But hey, at least they apologized, right?:

But we regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to victims of the violence and to the U.S. soldiers caught in its midst.


Blogger katiedid said...

Criminy. That's just... ugh.

3:10 AM  
Blogger Shannon said...

I just can't get over this one. I posted about it on my blog today too - somehow a retraction and/or an apology just doesn't seem to be enough. People are dead! And unfortunately, I'm afraid even more people will be killed.

And of course, no one in that region believes the retraction and says our government must have made them do the retraction. So regardless of what Newsweek does NOW, the damage has been done and thanks to them, our servicemembers deployed in the middle east are in more danger today due to their negligence!

Goodness, this has me so angry. I'm so tired of our press caring so little about our country and those serving our country in that region, that they will print ANYTHING to make things worse....regardless of how many lives it costs. And apparently, regardless of whether it's true or not. I take it reporters no longer have to verify anything before it goes to print...especially not when the information portrays the military or our country in a bad light.

Ok, sorry to rant on your blog too :(. This just has me so upset...

8:42 PM  
Blogger Chris said...

I tried to post a comment on here earlier today. Blogger is horrible.

I agree that Newsweek totally messed up. I agree that they should be held responsible for their own publications. I will agree with everything that gets handed out here, but not just yet.

George W. Bush was wrong about WMD in Iraq. He was wrong and thousands of people have been killed. And thousands more will be probably. How is this any different?

The American government published reports about Iraqi WMD capabilities. All turned out to be wrong. How is the Newsweek any different?

The American government published a fake document which it insisted proved Saddam was trying to obtain WMD material from Africa. The document was fake. What's the difference?

I understand the realms of journalism. I also understand the ethics involved in all.

How is this any different from, oh let's say, the fake reporter loaded with snowball questions Bush placed in his press conferences?

How is this any different from, oh let's say, Bush paying commentators to do fake stories about failed presidential policies, like the No Child Left Behind scandal?

What's the difference between this Newsweek deal and the press, just two years ago, not double checking the facts, and seemingly printing anything the government said to be true concerning the run up to the invasion of Iraq?

The press took the Bush administration for its word, without double checking anything. What's the difference? To me that's ethically just as wrong.

I could go on and on.

Rumsfield coming out and saying that the apology is not enough, is just so comical.

Bush hasn't apologized any for all his mistakes. Bush's actions of being wrong have cost way more lives than anything Newsweek has done.

12:27 AM  
Blogger CaliValleyGirl said...

MJ, I was reading a post at DailyKos, entitled "Pot meet Kettle" that said just that.
I feel differently about this, than you, suffice to say.

I think the role of the media can't be compared to the role of a president. The role of the media is to inform. The role of the president is to make decisions, and lead a country. Publishing an article that is false is a total failure, and the editors at Newsweek agree. But the jury is still out over Bush's leadership.

12:34 AM  
Blogger Chris said...

Oh, but ValleyGirl, the government has published many such articles that are just as wrong as Newsweek.

I totally agree that this is a case of pot meet kettle or whatever.

Rush Limbaugh sends out a newsletter that is filled with false information. What is the difference?

I do not think it's okay for the government to lie, whether it's Bush or not.

Most of Bush's economic data is filled with errors. And his debate about Social Security is some of the most dishonest I have ever heard.

I believe conservatives like to use the term "trickle down" when they refer to something that starts at the top and works its way down.

Government dishonesty spreads to the media. How can we expect the media to be honest when the president isn't?

5:16 AM  
Blogger Sminklemeyer said...


How the hell do you know he was wrong? We're you there? I would say Saddam was a weapon of mass destruction himself. Have you ever talked to a person whose entire family has been wiped out by that asshole? Did we find a large nuclear warhead? No. But what we did find was a country awaiting to be freed. What we found was a lot of non-Iraqis showing up to fight in Iraq rather than America. I tell you what, MJ, since your types always have the answers. Would you like another Sept. 11? See that's what the President is doing. He's being proactive rather than sitting back drinking a latte and reading philosophical bull shit. I am sick and tired of people like you, MJ, who have the answer to everything and muck up the world with your ridicules statements. You have know idea what it is like in Iraq and you have no idea how much we were / are needed there. And you have no idea how much people in that region hate us. You probably want to think that they have the right to have their own opinion and if they hate us, well, that's their right. But, their hate is different than ours. We express our hate with a finger. They express theirs with an AK 47. I promise you that we have killed thousands of U.S. haters who would love to drive a car bomb up to an American school. But I suppose with your logic, that is their right. So the next time you are in your liberal little coffee shop reading Larry the Liberal's column, picture a car loaded with explosives sitting outside the shop window that still has a "Kerry" sign and ask yourself if you would rather ask the suicide bomber if he has a bomb in his car or would you want to wait and find out. George Bush doesn't wait; he is proactive. While people like you, sit around and read worthless garbage and drink your over-sugared lattes. In other words, MJ, shut up!

2:37 PM  
Blogger Household6 said...

All I can say is "Check your sources."

This isn't the first time this has happened in journalism. There was that one journalist that went around for years making up sources and information before he was caught.

Unfortunately though, this circumstance had deadly results. Of course this does not help relations over there either. The cultural differences smack head to head sometimes and its a shame that this article had to be fuel for the fire.

4:03 PM  
Blogger Chris said...

ValleyGirl, I will spare your blog the personal tirade.

7:23 PM  
Blogger Chris said...

I will just continue my friendship with Sminky on his site.

8:11 PM  
Blogger Sminklemeyer said...

There's nothing like a new friend. Welcome to my circle. Please check your shoes at the door.

10:13 PM  
Blogger CaliValleyGirl said...

MJ and Sminky,

Oh man, this is going to be exciting. Do I get front row tickets?

11:42 PM  
Blogger Shannon said...

I ran across a blog a few minutes ago with this post: Mistakes Were Made. While reading, I thought - gosh I don't read any far left leaning blogs. Where in the world did I read the "But Bush lied, so what is the difference?" defense of Newsweek lol?!

Then it dawned on me lol. So I thought I'd come post a link to it ;).

While I'm back reading this again, there's another point or two I'd like to make: I'm not a Rush fan but I thought I'd point this out. MJ said, "Rush Limbaugh sends out a newsletter that is filled with false information. What is the difference?

Well, the difference is, one is an actual news publication, hence they report hard news. The other is an opinion radio commentator. He offers opinions of the news. Like I said, I'm not a Rush fan, but I find it hard believe that he flat out lies. Most likely he interprets things a lot different than you do. If he were out and out lying, I just don't think he would have as large of a following as he does.

The American government published reports about Iraqi WMD capabilities. All turned out to be wrong. How is the Newsweek any different?
Actually, they published reports on the intelligence they had at the time. None of which were from "on the ground" sources still living in Iraq and working within the former regime. They did the best they could with what they had. Which, thanks to the Clinton Administration's changes and rules regarding human intelligence sources, truly hindered the CIA's ability to recruit - which in turn impacted our ability to gather. Thankfully, changes have been implemented and hopefully our future intelligence capabilities will be much more accurate. For national security reasons, I sure hope so. We face an extremely brutal and dangerous enemy who will stop at nothing to kill us all...

12:45 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home