OPINION

Newsweek: Breach of journalism ethics, or government scapegoat?

Written by Chelsea Smith
Published May 20, 2005

Do you remember high school, when the popular and all-powerful jocks would make the lowly geeks do their dirty work? Naturally, the geeks obliged, because it was the only way they could get any face value in the high school social scene. Biology homework? Done. English paper? In your locker by tomorrow. Lunch money? Here, I wasn't hungry anyway.

It's amazing how these high school heirarchies transcend into society. Case in point: the Newsweek scandal. We've all heard it by now: Newsweek reporting desecration of the Koran at Guantanamo Bay during interrogations of Islamic prisoners, then retracting it soon after, claiming their information could not be backed.

That's right, Newsweek provided a retraction. The thing many people seem to overlook, however, is that a retraction is not necessarily Newsweek saying, "We lied and we're full of shit." To retract something is to take back what you said. That doesn't mean you don't believe it.

During a particularly heated argument when I was 16, I told my mother she was a manic-depressive nutjob. After about two hours of her loudly sobbing in her bedroom, and at my father's prodding, I begrudgingly told her I took it back.

Didn't mean I didn't think she was a manic-depressive nutjob. Most days, I still think it. I took back what I said because it was the nice thing to do, because it's what my father wanted to do, and it was what would best calm my mother.

Newsweek has never denied that events they detailed in their article. And interestingly enough, neither has the American government.

That being said, back to that high school heirarchy. Remember when the jocks would get busted for utilizing slave geek labor? They denied all wrongdoing (if they were smart, which I know is in itself an oxymoron). It was the geek's fault. The geeks were all wrong. Those bad, evil geeks — "Don't look at us, it was all them. They are the ones you should be busting!"

The American government is brushing the dirt off its hypothetical letterman jacket and letting the American media — who are ultimately the geeks grown up and with college degrees — take the fall.

Maybe Newsweek had a bit of truth in its story. I don't know; I've lived in a college dorm for two years now, and I've seen the flushing capacity of a economy toilet. It's barely enough for the waste products of St. Patrick's Day festivities (which I can personally attest to, but no matter). Maybe, just maybe, they were right.

But it's not Newsweek that takes the fall for that story if it's true. No, it's the American government. It's not Newsweek reporters flushing the Koran. It's American soldiers.

So America gets hit with the backlash. And instead of investigating the allegations, instead of a Senate hearing, the American government does what comes easiest to this country: blame the journalists.

Maybe I'm cynical because I'm a journalist myself. Or maybe I'm just the optimist in that I hope that Newsweek did indeed know what it was doing.

In high school, the teachers took a shining to the geeks, because most teachers were geeks themselves at some point. My only hope is that the geeks come out on top on this one, because the all-powerful jocks must inevitably fall for their indiscretions.

Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
Newsweek: Breach of journalism ethics, or government scapegoat?
Published: May 20, 2005
Type: Opinion
Section: Politics
Filed Under: Politics: U.S.
Writer: Chelsea Smith
Chelsea Smith's BC Writer page
Chelsea Smith's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Chelsea Smith
Politics: U.S.
All Politics Articles
All Opinion articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — May 20, 2005 @ 01:02AM — SFC SKI

Maybe you are forgetting that a responsible journalist will check the facts before presenting them.

#2 — May 20, 2005 @ 02:14AM — Matthew T. Sussman [URL]

You're right, SFC SKI, and I looked back at Newsweek editor Mark Whitaker's statement following the story, detailing how the two reporters came to get the facts:

"Their information came from a knowledgeable U.S. government source, and before deciding whether to publish it we approached two separate Defense Department officials for comment. One declined to give us a response; the other challenged another aspect of the story but did not dispute the Qur'an charge."

What it sounds like Chelsea's trying to say is that soldiers at Guantanamo aren't doing the most savory acts to their prisoners -- allegations probably stack as high as Yao Ming. And the Newsweek investigative reporter knew this and printed a story he -- along with their editors -- felt was substantiated enough to run.

Maybe it's true, maybe it's not. It probably wasn't true. But I agree that many people see the word "retraction" and automatically think "they admit it's total ballyhoo."

Journalists are faced with ethical dilemmas every day. No, every hour. They can't bat 1.000 all the time. But the public expects them to and they do a damn good job virtually all of the time.

Nice post, Chelsea.

#3 — May 20, 2005 @ 08:00AM — Nancy

Considering that governments aren't known for truth-telling anyway, and this particular administration has been consistently and constantly shovelling out the most gratuitous lies, often for no particular reason, I can understand why no one believes Newsweek's retraction. The credibility gap isn't Newsweek's, it's the Bush government's.

#4 — May 20, 2005 @ 09:01AM — Shark

BUSH ADMINISTRATION SMOKE SCREEN WARNING!

(This whole thing sounds like a set-up to me.)

The Far Right and the Bushies current goal seems to be to discredit the free press in America. Apparently, they'll be happy when a free press is established in Iraq, but even happier when it's gone from America. Go figure.

Additional irony: thanks to this 'story' -- no one is talking about Iraq, the "war" on terror, the prison scandals at Abu Ghraib, the years of allegations of abuse coming out of Gitmo, or the complicity of the US military in making a mockery of the Geneva accords.

They're too busy attacking Newsweek and that eternally evil "liberal media".


=======

(And if one more person uses the phrase "KoranGate", I'm gonna stalk them and drill 1/4 inch holes in their skull with a rusty melon-baller!)


#5 — May 20, 2005 @ 10:02AM — Aaman [URL]

Interestingly, their attempt at Googlebombing seems to have failed. The term in question, when googled, does not bring up the weekly mag in dispute on the front page of search results.

#6 — May 20, 2005 @ 10:51AM — Chelsea Lou [URL]

(And if one more person uses the phrase "KoranGate", I'm gonna stalk them and drill 1/4 inch holes in their skull with a rusty melon-baller!)

Actually, the term I've heard amongst my friends is "flushgate." It just sounds more upbeat...

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/29783)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments