|
|
Subject: 'Devastating' Moyers Probe of Press and Iraq
From: Relpo Miraculous
Date: 4/27/2007 4:01:53 PM
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=21&ItemID=12653
'Devastating' Moyers Probe of Press and Iraq
by Greg Mitchell
April 24, 2007
Printer Friendly Version
EMail Article to a Friend
The most powerful indictment of the news media for falling down in its
duties in the run-up to the war in Iraq will appear next Wednesday, a
90-minute PBS broadcast called "Buying the War," which marks the
return of "Bill Moyers Journal." E&P was sent a preview DVD and a
draft transcript for the program this week.
While much of the evidence of the media's role as cheerleaders for the
war presented here is not new, it is skillfully assembled, with many
fresh quotes from interviews (with the likes of Tim Russert and Walter
Pincus) along with numerous embarrassing examples of past statements
by journalists and pundits that proved grossly misleading or wrong.
Several prominent media figures, prodded by Moyers, admit the media
failed miserably, though few take personal responsibility.
The war continues today, now in its fifth year, with the death toll
for Americans and Iraqis rising again -- yet Moyers points out, "the
press has yet to come to terms with its role in enabling the Bush
Administration to go to war on false pretenses."
Among the few heroes of this devastating film are reporters with the
Knight Ridder/McClatchy bureau in D.C. Tragically late, Walter
Isaacson, who headed CNN, observes, "The people at Knight Ridder were
calling the colonels and the lieutenants and the people in the CIA and
finding out, you know, that the intelligence is not very good. We
should've all been doing that."
At the close, Moyers mentions some of the chief proponents of the war
who refused to speak to him for this program, including Thomas
Friedman, Bill Kristol, Roger Ailes, Charles Krauthammer, Judith
Miller, and William Safire.
But Dan Rather, the former CBS anchor, admits, "I don't think there is
any excuse for, you know, my performance and the performance of the
press in general in the roll up to the warWe didn't dig enough. And we
shouldn't have been fooled in this way." Bob Simon, who had strong
doubts about evidence for war, was asked by Moyers if he pushed any of
the top brass at CBS to "dig deeper," and he replies, "No, in all
honesty, with a thousand mea culpas, nope, I don't think we followed
up on this."
Instead he covered the marketing of the war in a "softer" way,
explaining to Moyers: "I think we all felt from the beginning that to
deal with a subject as explosive as this, we should keep it, in a way,
almost light if that doesn't seem ridiculous."
Moyers replies: "Going to war, almost light."
Walter Isaacson is pushed hard by Moyers and finally admits, "We
didn't question our sources enough." But why? Isaacson notes there was
"almost a patriotism police" after 9/11 and when the network showed
civilian casualties it would get phone calls from advertisers and the
administration and "big people in corporations were calling up and
saying, 'You're being anti-American here.'"
Moyers then mentions that Isaacson had sent a memo to staff, leaked to
the Washington Post, in which he declared, "It seems perverse to focus
too much on the casualties or hardship in Afghanistan" and ordered
them to balance any such images with reminders of 9/11. Moyers also
asserts that editors at the Panama City (Fla.) News-Herald received an
order from above, "Do not use photos on Page 1A showing civilian
casualties. Our sister paper has done so and received hundreds and
hundreds of threatening emails."
Walter Pincus of the Washington Post explains that even at his paper
reporters "do worry about sort of getting out ahead of something." But
Moyers gives credit to Charles J. Hanley of The Associated Press for
trying, in vain, to draw more attention to United Nations inspectors
failing to find WMD in early 2003.
The disgraceful press reaction to Colin Powell's presentation at the
United Nations seems like something out of Monty Python, with one key
British report cited by Powell being nothing more than a student's
thesis, downloaded from the Web -- with the student later threatening
to charge U.S. officials with "plagiarism."
Phil Donahue recalls that he was told he could not feature war
dissenters alone on his MSNBC talk show and always had to have "two
conservatives for every liberal." Moyers resurrects a leaked NBC memo
about Donahue's firing that claimed he "presents a difficult public
face for NBC in a time of war. At the same time our competitors are
waving the flag at every opportunity."
Moyers also throws some stats around: In the year before the invasion
William Safire (who predicted a "quick war" with Iraqis cheering their
liberators) wrote "a total of 27 opinion pieces fanning the sparks of
war." The Washington Post carried at least 140 front-page stories in
that same period making the administration's case for attack. In the
six months leading to the invasion the Post would "editorialize in
favor of the war at least 27 times."
Of the 414 Iraq stories broadcast on NBC, ABC and CBS nightly news in
the six months before the war, almost all could be traced back to
sources solely in the White House, Pentagon or State Dept., Moyers
tells Russert, who offers no coherent reply.
The program closes on a sad note, with Moyers pointing out that "so
many of the advocates and apologists for the war are still flourishing
in the media." He then runs a pre-war clip of President Bush
declaring, "We cannot wait for the final proof: the smoking gun that
could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." Then he explains: "The
man who came up with it was Michael Gerson, President Bush's top
speechwriter.
"He has left the White House and has been hired by the Washington Post
as a columnist."
|