h1

The NYT Finally Owns Up To Their Shoddy Iraq Reporting

July 8, 2007

It took a couple of weeks, but they got there.

I remember reading a Glenn Greenwald post a little while ago about how the media – and the Times specifically – was acting like stenographers lately regarding news coming from Iraq.  From June 23:

The Times — typically in the form of the gullible and always-government-trusting “reporting” of Michael Gordon, though not only — makes this claim over and over, as prominently as possible, often without the slightest questioning, qualification, or doubt. If your only news about Iraq came from The New York Times, you would think that the war in Iraq is now indistinguishable from the initial stage of the war in Afghanistan — that we are there fighting against the people who hijacked those planes and flew them into our buildings: “Al Qaeda.”

Then today I saw this show up on memeorandum: NYT – Seeing Al Qaeda Around Every Corner

Why Bush and the military are emphasizing Al Qaeda to the virtual exclusion of other sources of violence in Iraq is an important story. So is the question of how well their version of events squares with the facts of a murky and rapidly changing situation on the ground.

But these are stories you haven’t been reading in The Times in recent weeks as the newspaper has slipped into a routine of quoting the president and the military uncritically about Al Qaeda’s role in Iraq — and sometimes citing the group itself without attribution.

And in using the language of the administration, the newspaper has also failed at times to distinguish between Al Qaeda, the group that attacked the United States on Sept. 11, and Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, an Iraqi group that didn’t even exist until after the American invasion.

Do you suppose the people at the Times read Greenwald’s post?  Or did they finally see that proverbial light bulb appear over their heads on their own? 

I’m also kinda curious if Greenwald will notice.  Oops!  Just minutes after I posted this, I checked Salon.  He did notice (see Update II), after he got done railing the Times again.  Oh well.

Advertisements

3 comments

  1. Well, you know you’re a liberal when the New York Times is too pro-Bush for you.


  2. I don’t know what’s liberal about insisting that the NYT reports accurately and objectively on the Iraq war. I believe that criticism has come from both sides.


  3. I think they need to fix the negativity about Iraq before they appease the Left.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: