Media, The Truth, and Blogs

John Leo is all over the mainstream media on the Bremer story:

On June 28, Paul Bremer gave a farewell speech as he stepped down as U.S. administrator in Iraq. Some Iraqis, at least, found the talk moving. Ali Fadhil, 34, a resident in pediatrics at a Baghdad hospital, watched it on television with a group in the cafeteria. He said Bremer's words choked up even a onetime supporter of April's Shiite uprising. We have this information about the Bremer speech because Fadhil and his brothers are bloggers who file their own reports on the Internet ( iraqthemodel.blogspot.com). I had never heard of "Iraq the Model," but Margaret Wylie of Newhouse News Service produced a good story June 29 about Fadhil's blogging and Bremer's talk.

Word that Bremer actually gave the speech is something of a collector's item among American reporters. The Washington Post said Bremer left without giving a talk. The Los Angeles Times did worse. It missed the speech, then insulted Bremer for not giving it. A July 4 Times "news analysis" said: "L. Paul Bremer III, the civilian administrator for Iraq, left without even giving a final speech to the country--almost as if he were afraid to look in the eye the people he had ruled for more than a year." This is a good one-sentence example of what readers object to in much Iraq reporting--dubious or wrong information combined with a heavy load of attitude from the reporter.

Not sorry. Bloggers in the United States have been all over this story, quoting one another, leaning on the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times for an apology or a correction. Last Thursday, the Times published a correction of sorts. No apology, though, and no regret for the zinger aimed at Bremer. The Times said that Bremer taped an address that was given to Iraqi broadcast media and "not publicized to the western news media." So nobody at the Times watches Iraqi TV or reads blogs? One blogger wrote: "Bremer's farewell address had been common knowledge among readers of Internet blogs since at least June 30," four days before the Times criticized Bremer for having given no speech. Apparently nobody at the Times reads the American press either. Margie Wylie's Newhouse piece discussing the Iraqi reaction to the Bremer talk ran five days before the Times said the speech hadn't been given.

I've been watching this story - the Unit gets a daily update on his secure net (The Daily Dreck) at work. They published a "correction" to a snarky item saying Bremer had "snuck out of Iraq" without saying a word to anyone. The correction acknowledged Bremer made a "statement", but shirtily noted the statement was 'not made available to the Western media'. Apparently these intrepid investigative journalists have not plumbed the possibilities of television and the Internet as tools of their trade, preferring to wait on thermal-engraved invites or live data feeds from the White House. The fact that some western media (as well as many blogs) managed to scoop them somehow escaped the notice of the major wire services.

Leo slams the media for 'fact-free' reporting, and deservedly so. During the Bush AWOL debacle, the press corps that uncovered the Watergate scandal proved inexplicably unable to find a single Reservist with enough admin experience to decypher George Bush's drill records. This despite the fact that several blogs posted thorough reviews of said records -- and pronounced them unremarkable. Aghast, they expressed faux surprise over the failure of Bush's 'Band of Brothers' to come to his defense.

Yet when several of Bush's former Guard buddies came forward to testify to having seen him at drill during the periods in question, none of the major papers (Washington Post, LA Times, NY Times among others) picked up their stories. The testimonials were relegated to smaller papers and went unseen by the majority of voters. Apparently only innuendo is considered news - facts are irrelevant.

Blogs may be just gadflies, but they are beginning to have an effect. At best, they cause the media to retract obviously false stories. Milblogs and the Iraqi blogs get the good news (the news the press does not report) about the war in Iraq out to the small sub-section of the public who are on the Internet and want to be more informed. Sometimes, as with the Bill Cosby's remarks, blogs draw attention to stories the media wish to ignore.

If they do nothing but challenge the liberal press to look in the mirror and shake them out of their smug self-satisfaction, they will have provided a valuable service.

- Cassandra