Ten Years After Iraq: A Look At The Media’s Massive Failure
The 10th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq will remind most people of a divisive and dubious war that toppled Saddam Hussein but claimed the lives of nearly 4,500 Americans.
What it conjures up for me is the media’s greatest failure in modern times.
Major news organizations aided and abetted the Bush administration’s march to war on what turned out to be faulty premises. All too often, skepticism was checked at the door and the shaky claims of top officials and unnamed sources were trumpeted as fact.
By the time U.S. soldiers discovered there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the media establishment was left with apologies and explanations. The Bush-Cheney administration helped whip up an atmosphere in the wake of 9/11 in which media criticism of national security efforts seemed almost unpatriotic.
As the war, once sold as a cakewalk, went sour in 2004, the New York Times said in an editor’s note that its editors were “perhaps too intent on rushing scoops into the paper,” some of them erroneous stories by Judith Miller. The paper said its reporting on what turned out to be nonexistent WMDs was “not as rigorous as it should have been” and that the Times overplayed stories with “dire claims about Iraq.”
I was working at the Washington Post at the time, and I took it upon myself to examine the paper’s performance in the runup to war. It was not a pretty picture.
From August 2002 through the March 19, 2003 launch of the war, I found more than 140 front-page stories that focused heavily on administration rhetoric against Iraq: “Cheney Says Iraqi Strike Is Justified”; “War Cabinet Argues for Iraq Attack”; “Bush Tells United Nations It Must Stand Up to Hussein or U.S. Will”; “Bush Cites Urgent Iraqi Threat”; “Bush Tells Troops: Prepare for War.”
By contrast, pieces questioning the evidence or rationale for war were frequently buried, minimized or spiked.
Len Downie, then the executive editor, told me that in retrospect “we were so focused on trying to figure out what the administration was doing that we were not giving the same play to people who said it wouldn’t be a good idea to go to war and were questioning the administration’s rationale. Not enough of those stories were put on the front page. That was a mistake on my part.”
Bob Woodward told me that “we did our job but we didn’t do enough, and I blame myself mightily for not pushing harder.” There was a “groupthink” among intelligence officials, he said, and “I think I was part of the groupthink.”
Tom Ricks, who was the paper’s top military reporter, turned in a piece in the fall of 2002 that he titled “Doubts,” saying that senior Pentagon officials were resigned to an invasion but were reluctant and worried that the risks were being underestimated. An editor killed the story, saying it relied too heavily on retired military officials and outside experts—in other words, those with sufficient independence to question the rationale for war.
“There was an attitude among editors: Look, we’re going to war, why do we even worry about all this contrary stuff?” Ricks said.
Read more at CNN.com
Share this article
You might also like:
Comments
Latest Posts
Does Buzzfeed Rule the World?
June 13th, 2013The short answer: apparently. Well, at least the U.S. Senate.
During a hearing Wednesday on cybersecurity in the wake of the Edward Snowden surveillance leak, Barbara Mikulski, the Democrat who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, interrupted the proceedings. Her urgent mission? To read out and respond, in real time, to a tweet by Buzzfeed reporterRosie Gray.
We are not making this up.
MySpace Attempts Resurrection from the Digital Dead
June 13th, 2013Can circa 20th-century social platform of choice MySpace successfully return from “so ten years ago” limbo? We’ll find out, because the company is throwing $20 million at an ad campaign to make it happen. Fetch. The question is, will its return be welcomed like that of the legendarily beloved Persephone, or more like, say, equally legendary [...]
Facebook Loses Face, Adopts Hashtags From Twitter
June 13th, 2013It’s the moment we’ve all been waiting for (well, the Twitter-obsessed among us at least): Facebook has finally introduced hashtags, and our friends will no longer rag on us for peppering our status updates with numeral-signed dead ends.
Hashtags will be clickable and behave much as they do on Twitter, pulling up all the most recent posts using the hashtag, subject of course to one’s privacy settings. If only your friends can see what you post, only your friends will see you include in hashtag pages. You can put hashtags in the search box and it will pull up the latest updates on that hashtag.
Just as interesting is that hashtags that originate on other services like Twitter and Instagram that are carried over to Facebook when you post the link, will link to the Facebook hashtag. Oh, that’s a clever way to keep people on your site!
The Toilet Paper Chase: There’s An App For That
June 12th, 2013It’s hard enough to be Venezuelan, what with brownouts, blackouts, American hostility to your late leader, and (worst of all) toilet paper shortages. But what are you supposed to do when you can’t even find flour to make bread? Marie Antoinette had an answer for that, and we all know how well it worked out for her.
Undergraduate Jose Augusto Montiel and his sister have come to the rescue of ordinary Venezuelans with the Android-based app Abasteceme, Spanish for “Supply Me,” not to be confused with the defunct e-purchasing portal. Montiel, a chemical engineering student by day, and his sister, who handles the visual design, have self-funded development, and just make enough to cover costs.
Naturally, in this left-leaning country it relies on the will of The People; in other words, it’s a crowd-sourced database, listing where you can currently find in-demand and shortage-affected staples such as toilet paper, flour, sugar, milk, and cooking oil.
Cyberwarfare: How U.S. Messed With a Terrorist Magazine
June 11th, 2013We’ve just come across some illuminating details about what your everyday al-Qaeda member is reading for learning and leisure.
A story that appeared Tuesday in the Washington Post was actually about how U.S. intelligence operatives covertly sabotaged an online magazine in mid-May, delaying the release of its issue by two weeks. But what was fascinating was the information about the magazine itself.
First off–it’s called Inspire, it’s in English and it’s distributed by al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. “Inspire comprises first-person accounts of operations, exhortations to jihad and do-it-yourself advice for extremists,” according to the Post.
