The Laughing Wolf

Media, I Despair For Thee

It is clear that the war within the newsrooms between those who stayed home and those who had the courage, professionalism, and integrity to go become embeds is coming down on the side of the of the home team. As tales of quagmires, problems, and the specter of Vietnam are played for far more than they are worth, it is also worth noting that the ones doing this are not those who went and bothered to learn about the subject.

It is equally clear that serious problems remain within the The Media, or The Old Media as I now prefer to call them. Despite all that has happened, and all that it has cost them, many still cling tenaciously to “the cause” despite fact and painful drops in viewership, readership, and public confidence. They continue to do the same old thing, the same old way, in a manner that is a painful parody of what they once accused the military of doing (with some justification). That is, they continue to fight old wars in the trenches with mass attacks over the top, despite all those pesky helicopters zipping around.

My discussions of this here, here and here lay out a large part of the problem, and that problem lies almost exclusively with The Old Media. They have become so entrenched with the idea that they are not merely the opposition, but that their political viewpoints and agendas are the will of god (trust me, this one should be lowercase) and will prevail. They are true believers to the point that they have forgotten their oath to be impartial purveyors of the news, to be fair and balanced, and to hold faith with their readers, viewers, and listeners.

One of the recent signs of people not learning lessons comes from Andrew, who linked to this story about CNN. If this story is true, then CNN has clearly not learned the lessons needed from Iraq. The actions of CNN in regards Saddam are reprehensible from professional, ethical, and moral viewpoints. My take on it can be found here as well as at some of the other links above, and it is now imperative that a hard look be given to CNN and its operations in Iran, Cuba, Hong Kong, and other areas of authoritarian rule.

All of the major news outlets need such a review. It is clear that most are unwilling or unable to provide good, accurate, and complete coverage in such places. Iran is the easiest to document, since the lack of coverage provides a good point of reference for such a review. Hong Kong is another such place where great and potentially deadly things happened, and The Old Media was strangely silent, as were significant portions of The New Media. Don’t know what went on? Not surprising, so go over to Winds of Change and do a search or two.

This column about a Reuters story is most telling. What the reporter describes is nothing short of journalistic fraud, and the victims are the public and the reporter who’s byline and reputation they raped. When I was training and working as a journalist, the use of a byline on a wire story was quite something, and you could take pride – for the most part – in the story that went over the wire. There might be an occasional editing glitch, especially if you worked in a specialty field with which the wire editors were not familiar The difference between then and now, however, was that if an edit was in error, it would most often be corrected.

I have not linked to the Reuters article in question, because I want to help get the correction out, the correction that they refused to run. The truth needs to come out, and by spreading this column far and wide, we can help negate the impact of what was done.

Reuters is not a primary source for me, and has not been such for a while. There were several other instances where stories posted by them were shown to have “problems” to be even reasonably polite about it. To be very blunt, when I see a story from Reuters, I usually try to find other sources to verify it before I go with it, and most especially before I believe it. These are, after all, the people who refuse to use the word terrorist lest it offend, and similarly downplay 9-11 and other attacks. Such are not incidents or crimes, but acts of war and barbarity.

Then there are the multiple reports going around about the BBC, Reuters, and others “airbrushing” stories to remove problems and pretend they never happened. Now I admit that I will go in and correct spelling on occasion, or maybe change a word choice once in a blue moon, but I do not change the content or meaning of what I post. This is in many ways a day journal and as such it does not get the edit and polish it may deserve. I prefer for the most part to let it stand warts and all. If things change, I post updates and even new columns.

The Old Media has yet to grasp that what goes out on the Web is reviewed, checked, and often archived well away from their sites. They fail to realize that they are being watched, checked, and rechecked. They fail to realize that the Soviet game of airbrushing history will work about as well for them as it did for the Soviets, which is to say not at all. They also seem determined to follow in the steps of Geobbels and the big lie with their coverage. The memes displayed on Bush lied, Wag the Lynch, and a host of other stories follow the dictums of propaganda rather than objective news.

Fortunately, journalism is alive and well in other areas. One such is the blogosphere, where a dedicated and active group of people from all parts of the spectrum keep watch, and in doing so keep everyone as honest as possible. If The Old Media keeps going, they will be completely consumed. The great news is, that there is already something better rising from the ashes.

-30-

UPDATE: 25 July 2031 hours GMT: See new entry "CNN REFUTES" for new information.