Rather and other Media Mistakes 

Rather and other Media Mistakes

Dan Rather, his producer Mary Mapes and other senior people got caught using documents that were probably forged, from a highly discreditable source, in an attempt to add to the story of "whatever happened to W during those last two years he was in the Guard?"

The debate rages between left and right--the right saying no reporter should say anything about the "black hole" in W's life without police court evidence, or else that reporter is showing almost unbearable bias. The Main Stream Media should fess up to that bias. The left says the CBS folks, as always, were after a scoop--hoping to make headlines, not just find them.

I like the link from Atrios to a story about how Rather, among others from various news organizations, fell for a professional liar and con man in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. Er, not Chalabi this time. A "former U.S. Special Forces soldier named Jonathan Keith Idema."

In January 2002, Idema sold CBS sensational footage, which he called the "VideoX" tapes, that purported to show an Al Qaeda training camp in action. The tapes became the centerpiece of the bombshell 60 Minutes II piece, "Heart of Darkness," reported by Dan Rather and touted as "the most intimate look yet at how the world's deadliest terrorist organization trains its recruits." Idema also sold video stills to a number of print outlets, including The Boston Globe. MSNBC, ABC, NBC, the BBC, and others later replayed the tapes. Questions are now emerging about their authenticity, some of which were detailed in a piece by Stacy Sullivan in New York magazine in October.


Idema also served as an expert military commentator on Fox News and was a lead character in Robin Moore's best-selling book The Hunt for Bin Laden, which was supposed to chronicle the exploits of U.S. Special Forces in Afghanistan. And he fielded hundreds of interviews with major newspapers, television networks, and radio stations, which seemed to take his swaggering claims--that he was an active-duty Green Beret in Afghanistan, an undercover spy, an explosives expert, and a key player in the hunt for Osama bin Laden--at face value. Idema used the platform the media provided to spread dubious information, much of it with crucial implications for national security and foreign policy. For example, he claimed to have uncovered a plot to assassinate Bill Clinton; that bin Laden was dead, and that the Taliban was poisoning the food that the United States was air-dropping to feed hungry Afghans. (In fact, people were getting sick from eating the desiccant packed with the food.)


Idema's career as a media personality reached its peak during the final breathless weeks of the run-up to the war in Iraq. Much of the information he provided during that period echoed the Bush administration's hotly contested rationale for war. He told MSNBC that the link between Iraq and Al Qaeda was "common knowledge" on the ground in Afghanistan, and claimed in an interview with WNYC radio's Leonard Lopate that "Iraq has been involved in supporting Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations with money, with equipment, with technology, with weapons of mass destruction." He told other wide-eyed journalists that there was ample evidence linking "Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia to Al Qaeda and to the attacks on September 11," and professed to have firsthand knowledge of nuclear weapons being smuggled from Russia to all three members of the "axis of evil"--Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. Few in the media questioned Idema's claims, much to the alarm of some who knew him.


"The media saw this outfitted, gregarious, apparently knowing guy, and they didn't check him out," says Ed Artis, chairman and founder of the humanitarian organization Knightsbridge International, who met Idema in Afghanistan in late 2001 and later tried to warn the government and media organizations that Idema was misrepresenting himself. "They ran story after story that furthered the cachet of a self-serving, self-aggrandizing criminal."


[snip]: [as Idema offered his "training camp" video:]

CNN backed off precisely because it decided Idema could not be trusted. This was after the network's national security analyst, Ken Robinson, searched Google and LexisNexis and discovered that Idema not only had a criminal record, but also liked to batter his rivals with lawsuits. In addition to turning down the tapes, the network decided to shun Idema as a source. It was the only network to do so.


[blockquote]On January 17, CBS's 60 Minutes II ran a story about the tapes. [snip] ABC, MSNBC, NBC, and the BBC subsequently paid thousands of dollars to air the training-camp footage, according to Idema's bank records. [/blockquote]

Of all the networks, CBS had the longest-standing relationship with Idema. It had used him as a source or consultant on two projects before his arrival in Afghanistan. The first was the 1995 nuclear-smuggling story, called "The Worst Nightmare," which was produced by Scurka and aired on 60 Minutes


As Atrios says, no one is going to be fired over this stuff--it was just part of the war hysteria at the time. One high-powered media organization after another took a fall over the most worthless lies and hoaxes, for which they paid top dollar instead of doing actual reporting.

Yes, reporters are liberal, owners are conservative; conservatives have largely taken over cable and talk radio, which hardly existed in their present form 20 years ago. Howard Fineman says on the Newsweek site that CBS made a momentous decision when Cronkite (later joined by Rather) came out against the Vietnam war, and then the whole network came out against Nixon. You ain't gonna be treated like the voice of God if you're constantly in a street fight.

I still tend to think business drives decisions more than anything. That's why they always "stupid down" the news. Liberals are now saying the media went after Clinton; I still think the way they went after Carter was even more amazing. Carter had displayed a kind of ordinary incompetence, and made himself a bit ridiculous; the media, probably mostly people who admired him and intended to vote for him, went after him like sharks.

And let's not forget ordinary incompetence and carelessness. Past mistakes: it is hard to forget the time ABC's 20/20 aired a show about how "Buckwheat" from the Little Rascals was all growed up--and bagging groceries. They had the wrong guy; it was easy to find out where the real Buckwheat was (he was a film technician); and it was easy to discover that the guy they covered had been peddling his lies for 30 years. No one at ABC checked a single, solitary fact.

Here's a site that summarizes that episode among others--I like the time the NYT fell for a bunch of made-up hip/hop slang--obviously no one at the paper having a single clue about "the street."

What about NBC news and the exploding pickup truck? (They were trying to prove the truck was unsafe; they couldn't get it to explode "naturally," so they planted a bomb on it). What about CBS's treatment of General Westmoreland (Vietnam again).

I remember Chris Wallace (mighty Mike's kid) doing a piece about the antique business in NYC. He proved conclusively that some objects sold as "antiques" are not particularly old or valuable; some of them (gasp!) are mere reproductions. When he tries to discover how people make a fairly honest living in this business, he shows that they will buy from a show where they are exhibiting, and then sell at a higher price. Imagine: retail based on buying low, and selling high! Sometimes fraudulently! And in New York City! How could Wallace keep the solemn, stupid expression on his face long enough to get through this piece?

Return to Main Page

Comments

Add Comment




Search This Site


Syndicate this blog site

Powered by BlogEasy


Free Blog Hosting