Newsweek and Bad Reporting . . .

. . . or is it?

Another example of the left wing wanting to believe the worst of this government, military, and country. Lives have been lost and now Newsweek can join CBS in being a media joke.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050517/D8A4LSM02.html

May 16, 11:00 PM (ET)

By SETH SUTEL
 

(AP) A Muslim cleric speaks during a demonstration against the alleged desecration of Islam\'s holy book...
Full Image
 
NEW YORK (AP) - Newsweek magazine, under fire for publishing a story that led to deadly protests in Afghanistan, said Monday it was retracting its report that a military probe had found evidence of desecration of the Quran by U.S. interrogators at Guantanamo Bay.

Earlier Monday, Bush administration officials had brushed off an apology that Newsweek\'s editor Mark Whitaker had made in an editor\'s note and criticized the magazine\'s handling of the story.

Protests broke out across much of the Muslim world last week after Newsweek reported that U.S. investigators found evidence that interrogators had flushed a copy of Muslim\'s holy book down a toilet in an attempt to rattle detainees. The violence left about 15 dead and scores injured in Afghanistan.

"It\'s appalling that this story got out there," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said as she traveled home from Iraq.

 
(AP) Pedestrians walk past the Broadway entrance to the Newsweek building Monday, May 16, 2005 in New...
Full Image
 
 
"People lost their lives. People are dead," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on Capitol Hill. "People need to be very careful about what they say, just as they need to be careful about what they do."

Following the criticism, Whitaker released a statement through a spokesman later Monday saying the magazine was retracting the article.

"Based on what we know now, we are retracting our original story that an internal military investigation had uncovered Quran abuse at Guantanamo Bay," Whitaker said.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan called Newsweek\'s retraction "a good first step" but said it could not repair all the damage that had been done.

"The report had real consequences," McClellan said. "People have lost their lives. Our image abroad has been damaged. There are some who are opposed to the United States and what we stand for who have sought to exploit this allegation."

 
(AP) A pedestrian walks past the Broadway entrance to the Newsweek building Monday, May 16, 2005 in New...
Full Image
 
 
McClellan said the Pentagon had looked into the allegations initially and found nothing to substantiate them. "They continue to look into it," he said.

Newsweek had reported in its issue dated May 9 that U.S. military investigators had found evidence that interrogators placed copies of Islam\'s holy book in washrooms and had flushed one down the toilet to get inmates to talk.

Whitaker had written in a note to readers that "We regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to victims of the violence and to the U.S. soldiers caught in its midst."

Whitaker said in his note that while other news organizations had aired charges of Quran abuse based on the testimony of detainees, the magazine decided to publish a short item after hearing from an unnamed U.S. official that a government probe had found evidence corroborating the charges.

But on Friday, a top Pentagon spokesman told the magazine that a review of the military\'s investigation concluded "it was never meant to look into charges of Quran desecration."

The spokesman also said the Pentagon had looked into other charges by detainees that the Quran had been desecrated and found them to be "not credible."

Whitaker added that the magazine\'s original source later said he could not be sure he read about the alleged Quran incident in the report Newsweek cited, and that it might have been in another document. Whitaker said the magazine was still looking into the charges.

Many of the 520 inmates at Guantanamo are Muslims arrested during the U.S.-led war against the Taliban and its al-Qaida allies in Afghanistan.

In Afghanistan, Islamic scholars and tribal elders called for the punishment of anyone found to have abused the Quran, said Maulawi Abdul Wali Arshad, head of the religious affairs department in Badakhshan province.

Arshad and the provincial police chief said the scholars met in Faizabad, 310 miles northeast of the capital, Kabul, and demanded a "reaction" from U.S. authorities within three days.

Lebanon\'s most senior Shiite Muslim cleric on Sunday said the reported desecration of the Quran is part of an American campaign aimed at disrespecting and smearing Islam.

In a statement faxed to The Associated Press, Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah called the alleged desecration a "brutal" form of torture and urged Muslims and international human rights organizations "to raise their voices loudly against the American behavior."

On Saturday, Pakistan\'s President Gen. Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, both allies of Washington, demanded an investigation and punishment for those behind the reported desecration of the Quran.

The story also sparked protests in Pakistan, Yemen and the Gaza Strip. The 22-nation Arab League issued a statement saying if the allegations panned out, Washington should apologize to Muslims.

Newsweek is owned by The Washington Post Co. (WPO)

That article was nothing more than an attack on the Bush Administration that caused unnecessary deaths.

With no valid sources the article shouldn\'t have been printed.  This is how desperate and hateful the left has become - fabricating stories in order to damage Bush.  These journalists are so eager to report negative things about the US government that they are not even checking sources or facts anymore.

You\'re right. They take any bit of info that will make Bush or this country look like crap and they want to believe it so badly that they lose their senses and how to report a story.

cripes bet they weren\'t expecting to cause such a stir.

15 people dead over one article!?

[CHIZZY]

Just goes to show how fanatical those people are. I mean, in addition to the fact that they are continually blowing themselves up.

Originally posted by GigaShadow
That article was nothing more than an attack on the Bush Administration that caused unnecessary deaths.

With no valid sources the article shouldn\'t have been printed.  This is how desperate and hateful the left has become - fabricating stories in order to damage Bush.  These journalists are so eager to report negative things about the US government that they are not even checking sources or facts anymore.

Alright, well if you want to talk about the credentials the press had in going ahead with this story then why was the article reviewed by the Pentagon before it was printed, given the go-ahead, and then only questioned 10 days after it was published?

If you want to talk conspiracy of the "left-wing" media, then what about the opposite side? Couldn\'t this just be another case of the administration cracking down and smearing the press to create a distrust in the only access the people have to their governments and deconstruct the watchdog effect of modern media?

I\'m not validating either of these debates, just bringing them up. I think you are simply grazing over this issue, taking it at face value.

It was  sloppy journalism. It was sloppy handling by the Pentagon. But what it wasn\'t was a conniving and intentional attempt by the news media to "attack" the Bush administration (By the way Giga, I like how you capitalize Bush Administration...how godly.)

I\'m sick of criticism that modern news media is "liberal." What I think you and others who criticize today\'s newspapers for having a left-leaning slant need to understand is that newspapers are not intentionally trying to appear liberal, they are trying to be critical. That is on of the media\'s jobs -- to pick out what is wrong and what is corrupt in our government ...or in this case of Newsweek, at least try.

Newsweek did make a mistake but I do not believe it was aimed at starting violence nor was it an attack on the Repulican administration. Hell, one of the authors, Michael Isikoff, was crucial in investigating MonicaGate.

I\'d rather have a media "watch-dog" helping me understand and offer critisms of my government than pushing propaganda through my television screens.

Originally posted by Ghettomath
Alright, well if you want to talk about the credentials the press had in going ahead with this story then why was the article reviewed by the Pentagon before it was printed, given the go-ahead, and then only questioned 10 days after it was published?

This isn\'t about the Pentagon.  The Pentagon did not publish the article.  It is about Newsweek.  Nice way to try and shift blame away from this crappy rag.

Originally posted by Ghettomath
If you want to talk conspiracy of the "left-wing" media, then what about the opposite side? Couldn\'t this just be another case of the administration cracking down and smearing the press to create a distrust in the only access the people have to their governments and deconstruct the watchdog effect of modern media?

It is not a conspiracy theory, it is fact.  CBS, the NYT and now Newsweek.  As long as it makes our country look bad they will jump all over it regardless of the sources and the facts.  No one is cracking down the media, despite your misguided belief, because if that were the case - CBS would have been off the air months ago.  Watchdog...  My dog barks at things that aren\'t there as well.

Originally posted by Ghettomath
I\'m not validating either of these debates, just bringing them up. I think you are simply grazing over this issue, taking it at face value.

Grazing over what issue exactly?  That Newsweek misreported the news?

Originally posted by Ghettomath
It was  sloppy journalism. It was sloppy handling by the Pentagon. But what it wasn\'t was a conniving and intentional attempt by the news media to "attack" the Bush administration (By the way Giga, I like how you capitalize Bush Administration...how godly.)

Again, the Pentagon does not print a weekly news magazine, it is not their job.  The running of the story was Newsweek\'s alone.  I suppose Dan Rather\'s ficticious story on the Air National Guard wasn\'t an attack either?  Hatred really does make you blind doesn\'t it ghetto?  As for capitalizing it - that is the way its done for any President you moron.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=Bush+administration

Originally posted by Ghettomath
I\'m sick of criticism that modern news media is "liberal." What I think you and others who criticize today\'s newspapers for having a left-leaning slant need to understand is that newspapers are not intentionally trying to appear liberal, they are trying to be critical. That is on of the media\'s jobs -- to pick out what is wrong and what is corrupt in our government ...or in this case of Newsweek, at least try.

It sucks to be on the outside looking in doesn\'t it Ghetto?  Of course you are sick of the criticism of anything liberal because you ARE liberal.  

Originally posted by Ghettomath
Newsweek did make a mistake but I do not believe it was aimed at starting violence nor was it an attack on the Repulican administration. Hell, one of the authors, Michael Isikoff, was crucial in investigating MonicaGate.

I\'d rather have a media "watch-dog" helping me understand and offer critisms of my government than pushing propaganda through my television screens.

 

No it wasn\'t aimed at starting violence, but in an attempt to make an anti Bush article an unforseen consequence developed which makes liberals look just like the asshats they are.

I agree with what Chizzy said as well, the loonies don\'t need any more reasons to kill people than they already have.  Did Newsweek really think they were going to win some friends in the Middle East by reporting this garbage?  I don\'t think they actually thought anyone over there would get wind of it, but again they miscalculated.

[CHIZZY]

Interesting that this is the fist I\'ve heard anyone mention Newsweek in about 5 years.

Oh, and the Jews run the media, everyone knows that.

Originally posted by GigaShadow

Did Newsweek really think they were going to win some friends in the Middle East by reporting this garbage?  I don\'t think they actually thought anyone over there would get wind of it, but again they miscalculated.

Where has this pre-conceived notion that the news media has alterior motives beside reporting the news come from Giga? I\'m just interested. When did newspapers become "liberal"
to you?

When Newsweek and the rest of news media report, they simply collect and relay information. What happened here was a confusion in the relaying in the information from an anonymous source and the reporter. I don\'t understand how you can construe this into liberalism.



AP rules dictate "a"dministration.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/05/obscenity.prosecutions.ap/

Also,  president is never capitalized when it stands alone.

Can\'t keep God and President Bush separate, can you?
That\'s okay, neither can he.

Originally posted by Ghettomath
Where has this pre-conceived notion that the news media has alterior motives beside reporting the news come from Giga? I\'m just interested. When did newspapers become "liberal" to you?

When Newsweek and the rest of news media report, they simply collect and relay information. What happened here was a confusion in the relaying in the information from an anonymous source and the reporter. I don\'t understand how you can construe this into liberalism.

Wow, maybe when the news reporters were in such a rush to slander this administration that they didn\'t even check their sources.  I can\'t believe such lack of professionalism is being looked over this much.

Can\'t keep God and President Bush separate, can you?

Take off your blinders.  Once you do so maybe you\'d realize Giga isn\'t even that religious. :rolleyes: You and mystiq would be great friends.

Newsweek F\'d up.  They trusted a source without independent verification, and some Islamic nutters on the other side of the planet went crazy.  It was a bad call, and they should be more cautious about reporting on sensitive items like this that might have far reaching effects.

That\'s all well and good, and I think we all agree on that.

What I don\'t understand is Giga\'s reflexive assumption that this is an anti-Bush conspiracy concocted by some liberal media conspiracy.  "Newsweek" is one of  the blandest and most noncommittal news sources in the US.  It\'s right up there (or down there) with USA Today and other colorless news outlets determined to tell the American public what it already knows and probably already agrees with.  They are constantly running cover stories on topics spanning the gamut of Bush loving / red state / christian values / and stupid entertainment news.  Damn, they are in a competiton with Time to see how often they can run a picture of a Jesus or some other bible character on the cover!

I\'m not attacking Newsweek, I\'m just trying to say they are FAR from being a liberal magazine.  If you think they are, that is a very disturbing commentary on your skewed perspective of the world.  You need to take your paranoid goggles off.  Newsweek ran the story because they are interested in PROFIT.  They want to somehow "scoop" their other bland news competitors, and increase their circulation.  They are not grinding any axes for the Bush administration.

Headline:  Koran Flushed Down Toilet!

Yeah, I can see the $$$$ rolling in from that story.  :rolleyes:

USA Today non biased?  HAHAHAHAHAHAHA oh Core you are indeed a funny man.

Originally posted by Ghettomath

Also,  president is never capitalized when it stands alone.

Can\'t keep God and President Bush separate, can you?
That\'s okay, neither can he.

As Bozco said I am not religious.  Try again.  

Also admit you are wrong about Bush Administration or did you even bother to check google and the numerous references on there?

All of this over a friggen book? Psh.

Originally posted by GigaShadow


Also admit you are wrong about Bush Administration or did you even bother to check google and the numerous references on there?

As I previously posted, Associated Press standards use "a"dministration. Some papers do use Bush Adminstration though. So we are both correct. Sorry for nitpicking.

Whatever though, because you still haven\'t responded to Cored and I\'s posts relating to where your assumption of news media being "liberal" originated from.

What news publications do you consider liberal?

What news publications do you get your news from?