portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states

media criticism

Victory For The Press?

Judith Miller should have kept her mouth shut out of shame. The more the situation unfolds, the more it is plain that she was used as a tool, fell into the trap that is all too typical. If she had been anything close to independent, she would have never gone to jail.
So, Ms. Miller gives a 'carefully worded statement,' according to truthout. It's pretty obvious she was led to jail through her sources, she believed them, printed what they wanted her to print. I'm sorry, but I can't feel sorry for her. She was cultivated and harvested, and still likely believes what she was told about WMD and the 'CIA's backpedaling' on the intelligence concerning the existence of them in Iraq. It's a page right out of a BDSM handbook, she becoming their slave. Where was any effort to corroborate her sources? She just blindly accepted opinions upon documents and intelligence interpretations. Libby drips over her and she melts...Why would she think that he'd be afraid of her testimony? Again, the emphasis is that she thought that he could be incriminated, and even in her statement, shows Libby as anything but an objective source, one with an agenda to promote. She alludes to no suspicion of the information from such a source. The Times, too, should have been held to higher standards. There's no victory for the press here. We, though, should be thankful that they've showed us, through this, their methods and what little regard they have for objectivity. Because of the Judith Millers, the 'news'papers for whom they work will not question, fortunately, more and more of us are.
Hope you had a nice time in jail, Judy. I also wish you'd learned something there, but, apparently, you're too much of a toilet slave to come back now.
Hint 16.Oct.2005 10:59

gk

According to TruthOut, it could be the downfall of Bush and Cheney. I've got my fingers crossed!

Kristol: Rove and Libby Will Be Indicted 16.Oct.2005 14:14

Think Progress

Bill Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, commenting on Fox News Sunday about the leak scandal:

KRISTOL: But talking to people pretty close to both Libby and Rove outside of government, who therefore can talk about it, I think they expect the worse now. I think they -

WALLACE: That both Libby and Rove will be indicted.

KRISTOL: I believe, if I had to predict - and I don't know more this than anybody else reading the papers - that both Libby and Rove will be indicted, not for what the original referral was about but for some combination of disclosing classified information or perhaps failing to be fully candid with federal investigators or with the grand jury.

To review: Kristol talks to people close to Libby and Rove, then claims he knows nothing more than anybody else. He goes on to predict the two of them will be indicted "not for what the original referral was." But Kristol then says Rove and Libby will be indicted for, among other crimes, "disclosing classified information" - which is exactly what the CIA referral  http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0903/092903gsn1.htm was about.

The right-wing is already spinning themselves into knots as they struggle to defend the conduct of the White House.


see also: Flame On, Flame Off 16.Oct.2005 14:15

-


Disgrace to Journalism 16.Oct.2005 14:56

by Armando

Sun Oct 16, 2005 at 01:05:37 PM PDT

Judith Miller is clearly a disgrace to journalism - I agree completely with Arianna Huffington, who shamed every member of the Media with her ownership of the NYTimes/Miller story, in this:

The Times articles are inconclusive about a lot of issues, but they are devastatingly conclusive about Miller as a journalist -- including, the confirmation that, within a few weeks of assuming the editorship of the Times, "in one of his first personnel moves, Mr. Keller told Ms. Miller that she could no longer cover Iraq and weapons issues," and including the Times' long-delayed acknowledgement that 5 of the 6 articles in its WMD mea culpa "were written or co-written by Ms. Miller."

One thing we do know about Judy Miller is that she's no dummy. Whether or not Libby said the words "Valerie Plame," and whether or not Libby knew or revealed that Plame was covert, it's inconceivable that Miller did not know what was going on: a high-level administration official was trying to smear a critic of the administration. That's news. That's something the readers of the New York Times --and the American people -- deserved to know, and yet she did nothing with the information.

It is an embarrassment to the NYTimes and all of us who bothered to defend Miller's refusal to reveal her source on journalistic grounds. We are covered with egg today.

But the rest of the Media has also disgraced itself on this story. The DC Media establishment is covered in hypocrisy and disgrace:

THE LYING OFFENDS THEM. For both politicians and journalists, trust is the coin of the realm. Without trust, the system breaks down.

"We have our own set of village rules," says David Gergen, editor at large at U.S. News & World Report, who worked for both the Reagan and Clinton White House. "Sex did not violate those rules. The deep and searing violation took place when he not only lied to the country, but co-opted his friends and lied to them. That is one on which people choke.

. . . "[S]ays Chris Matthews, who once was a top aide to the late Speaker of the House Thomas P. "Tip" O'Neill . . . "[t]here has to be a functional trust by reporters of the person they're covering. Clinton lies knowing that you know he's lying. It's brutal and it subjugates the person who's being lied to. I resent deeply being constantly lied to."

. . . "His behavior," says Lieberman, "is so over the edge. What is troubling is the deceit, the failure to own up to it. Before this is over the truth must be told."

. . . "The judgment is harsher in Washington," says The Post's Broder. "We don't like being lied to."

Liars.

On the flip I want to take a closer look at 4 other journalists (other than Miller and Cooper, of course Novak was also involved but he has not been a journalist for a long time) who KNEW the Bush Administration was lying -- Tim Russert, Chris Matthews, and Andrea Mitchell of NBC; and the one honorable and professional journalist to emerge from this disgrace -- Walter Pincus of the Washington Post. Pincus was the one journalist who called the liars liars.

* ::
*

The lying by the Bush Administration, including by Bush himself, were known immediately by 6 reporters -- Tim Russert, Chris Matthews, Andrea Mitchell, Judith Miller, Matt Cooper, and Walter Pincus. Here was the lie:

Q: Given -- given recent developments in the CIA leak case, particularly Vice President Cheney's discussions with the investigators, do you still stand by what you said several months ago, a suggestion that it might be difficult to identify anybody who leaked the agent's name?

THE PRESIDENT: That's up to -

Q: And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. And that's up to the U.S. Attorney to find the facts.

There was nothing ambiguous about the White House lie:

Q: All right. Let me just follow up. You said this morning, "The President knows" that Karl Rove wasn't involved. How does he know that?

MR. McCLELLAN: . . . I said it is simply not true. So, I mean, it's public knowledge. I've said that it's not true. And I have spoken with Karl Rove --. . .

Q . . . I'm not asking what you said, I'm asking if the President has a factual basis for saying -- for your statement that he knows Karl Rove --

MR. McCLELLAN: He's aware of what I've said, that there is simply no truth to that suggestion. And I have spoken with Karl about it.

What did Tim Russert do to report this blatant lying by the Bush Administration? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. He lied to his audience and pretended he didn't know the truth.

Here's how Richard Schmitt reported it in the Los Angeles Times:

SCHMITT (8/10/04): NBC issued a statement saying the network made Russert available under an agreement where he was not required to appear before the grand jury and was not asked questions that would have required him "to disclose information provided to him in confidence."

"Mr. Russert told the special prosecutor that, at the time of that conversation, he did not know Ms. Plame's name or that she was a CIA operative, and that he did not provide that information to Mr. Libby," the NBC statement said.

"Mr. Russert said that he first learned Ms. Plame's name and her role at the CIA when he read a column written by Robert Novak later that month."

Did Tim Russert report any of this to his audience? Why no. Not ever. A disgrace. But Tim Russert has never been a true journalist. He is a political hack whose connections landed him a spot at NBC and then the Meet the Press gig that he has, to be fair, turned into the must see spot on Sunday talk.

Because Russert has always been a political animal, it is hardly surprising that he felt no obligation to his audience. As Somerby says, he plays us for rubes every Sunday. And his lying to his audience about what he knew about Plamegate is par for the course.

Chris Matthews, a/k/a Tweety, is another political animal turned pundit who has no claim to journalism. He also lied to his audience about what he knew about the BushCo lying on Plamegate:

In early October 2003, NEWSWEEK reported that immediately after Novak's column appeared in July, Rove called MSNBC "Hardball" host Chris Matthews and told him that Wilson's wife was "fair game." But White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters at the time that any suggestion that Rove had played a role in outing Plame was "totally ridiculous." On Oct. 10, McClellan was asked directly if Rove and two other White House aides had ever discussed Valerie Plame with any reporters. McClellan said he had spoken with all three, and "those individuals assured me they were not involved in this."

Chris Matthews lied to his audience by pretending he did not know this. He let BushCo lie and enjoyed it. After his sanctimony about Clinton's sex lies, what more do we need to know about the disgrace that is Tweety.

Andrea Mitchell actually is a veteran television reporter, but she has this little conflict problem, she is married to Alan Greenspan. But she knew BushCo was lying and said nothing. Except pretend she was not involved.

Now finally, let's review the work of a real journalist -- one who respects his profession - Walter Pincus:

After he went public in 2003 about the trip, senior Bush administration officials, trying to discredit Wilson's findings, told reporters that Wilson's wife, who worked at the CIA, was the one who suggested the Niger mission for her husband. Days later, Plame was named as an "agency operative" by syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak, who has said he did not realize he was, in effect, exposing a covert officer. A Senate committee report would later say evidence indicated Plame suggested Wilson for the trip.

There. A plain declarative statement. "Senior Bush Administration officials, trying to discredit Wilson's findings, told reporters that Wilson's wife, who worked at the CIA, was the one who suggested the Niger mission for her husband." BushCo lied.

Here's more--

Senior Bush administration officials told a different story about the trip's origin in the days between July 8 and July 12, 2003. They said that Wilson's wife was working at the CIA dealing with weapons of mass destruction and that she suggested him for the Niger trip, according to three reporters.

Here's more --

This Washington Post reporter spoke the next day to an administration official, who talked on the condition of anonymity, and was told in substance "that the White House had not paid attention to the former ambassador's CIA-sponsored trip to Niger because it was set up as a boondoggle by his wife, an analyst with the agency working on weapons of mass destruction," as reported in an Oct. 14 article.

Want more reporting by a reporter? this:

A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked "(S)" for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials.

Plame -- who is referred to by her married name, Valerie Wilson, in the memo -- is mentioned in the second paragraph of the three-page document, which was written on June 10, 2003, by an analyst in the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), according to a source who described the memo to The Washington Post.

The June 10 memo is critical to this story of course. It demonstrates that the Wilson attack was coordinated prior to Wilson's July 6 op-ed, as Judith Miller's testimony now makes clear.

As demonstrated today on Political hack George Stephanopolous's show, those folks who have no respect for journalism will now attack Fitzgerald and defend their other DC hack friends. Remember these people, and the dishonor and disgrace they do to the profession of journalism.

It is not just Judith Miller. It is the whole DC Cocktail Party Circuit establishment. These are the same people that gave BushCo a pass in lying to the country in order to force the Iraq Debacle down our throats.


why. 16.Oct.2005 19:23

this thing here

why can shit like this happen. because, for one reason, the press failed in it's duty.

why can a war in iraq happen. because, for one reason, the press failed in it's duty.

why did the press fail?

because the press is not independent. it is dependent.

it feeds on the politicians, and the politicans feed on the press. and both the press and the politicans feed from the corporate trough, and the corporate trough cannot exist without the press and the politicians.

my point is that the press, the politicans, the government, the corporations, they are now all the same organism. they are not different, independent animals. they are the same animal.

what species is this single animal?

it goes by the term corporatism. as it matures, this animal's coat and fur begins to change, and at that point, some call it fascism.

welcome to your new american century. freedom, democracy, a free and independent press, checks and balances... all that shit is out of date. it doesn't feed the corporatist animal. it doesn't help the corporatist animal to grow stronger. and so it will be taken out behind the barn, seduced by a charming man looking like karl rove, or maybe dick cheney, or maybe rupert murdoch, or william kristol, or a combination of these charming gentlemen, where it will be abused, raped and shot. (if it hasn't been already...)

"journalism" and "professionalism" 17.Oct.2005 03:09

moved the working class out of the newspapers

"And we might as well begin with the word 'journalism': In 1947 when I first walked into the city room of the Baltimore Sun, no respectable reporter would have uttered the word with a straight face.

"The word 'journalist' was used only in comic mockery. It suggested a society reporter giving himself airs at a country-club tea dance.

"A similar stigma attached to schools of journalism, which were still comparatively few. Anyone who had attended journalism school was thought to have wasted a chance to get a good college education.

"H. L. Mencken, who was still at the Baltimore Sun when I started there, had, in print, pronounced journalism schools a waste of time.

"In six weeks in the newsroom, he said, he could teach the most innocent novice everything necessary to make him a competent journeyman newsman."

-- Russell Baker