NBC War Correspondent Advises: Don’t Trust Major Media

The very core practices of the major media that Americans and the world depend upon for their news is increasingly proven unreliable. This is not just a matter of snarky bias or of transparent or selective hit pieces. It is a degree of rot being exposed that is shocking even to critics. This goes beyond the arguable undermining of our internal security by revealing secrets. It has gotten to the unarguable point where the very external security of not only the United States but of its allies is directly undermined and, indeed, future peace made more remote.

Nothing less will do than an independent, wholesale, public, expert examination of major media reporting procedures, and thorough follow-through reforms. That may be much to ask for, but aside from the airwaves still being public property, and various tax and shield benefits specific to newspapers, it is in the business interests of the major media to be forthcoming and vigorous in this effort or speed their decline.

Lest anyone need further evidence than the most recent examples of corrupt photoshop frauds (see here and here), the extent of the foul stain keeps spreading beyond Reuters.

Dan Riehl examines “Qana Exposed,” the incident which increasingly appears manufactured for Hezbolywood that led to worldwide condemnation of Israel’s necessary defense. Jim Hoft reveals the New York Times’ photo that is an obvious fraud, here (also see here). Here's more.

Now, a top, experienced NBC war correspondent speaks out:

As a veteran journalist who has been in countless war zones around the world (especially the Middle East) as an NBC network correspondent, it pains me to see what passes for accurate coverage in the early stages of a conflict like the one between Israel and Hezbollah.

Because almost none of the American television networks have a vast stable of experienced reporters any longer who understand the region, they employ the old "parachute them in" philosophy, i.e. dispatching perfectly good -- and frequently very young -- journalists, few of whom have any experience in covering this story and don’t stand a snowball's chance in Gaza of getting it right initially. They engage in what I call "nerve end journalism." reporting what they think they see in one of the most confusing places on earth, with very little context. Their movements are also very restricted by both sides.

In the case of Beirut and other parts of Lebanon under the control of terrorists, Hezbollah usually runs daily press tours, making sure reporters and photographers see the worse that Israel has inflicted -- killing civilians, etc. -- in order to slate the coverage, but never reveals that Hezbollah uses private homes, mosques, schools, hospitals and other public buildings for their headquarters or to launch their lethal missiles.

Then there's the danger factor if a reporter angers his terrorist tour guides. Christopher Albritton, a freelance contributor for Time magazine, wrote in his blog a couple of weeks ago, "To the south, Hezbollah is launching Katyushas, but I'm loathe to say too much about them. The Party of God has a copy of every journalists' passport and they've already hassled a number of us and threatened one." They also take pictures of all journalists, warning they better follow the ground rules or else. Terrorists in that part of the world have been doing this for years.

"Hezbollah has a very sophisticated and slick media operation in suburban Beirut," says CNN’s Nic Robertson, one of the few seasoned TV reporters out there. "They deny journalists access." He adds that the terrorist group, "designated the places that we went to and we certainly didn't have time to go into houses or lift up the rubble to see what is underneath. They realize this is a good way for them to get their message out." So what you see back home is precisely what Hezbollah dictates.

On the Israeli side where there tends to be more experienced reporters like NBC's Martin Fletcher who has covered the region for three decades, journalists are rarely permitted access to fighting, but they are relatively free to cover civilian targets and casualties. But because these pictures are usually not as dramatic as those coming from Lebanon, network producers tend to lead with them while pushing Israel’s explanation for its actions further down the show to a position that casual viewers might never see.

Best advice. Reporting has been so inconsistent, if you really want to know what is going on, check out all the networks -- broadcast and cable -- as well as print sources and the Internet. Otherwise, you will never know if you are getting the straight scoop on the confusing Israeli-Hezbolla imbroglio.

I wrote in Editor & Publisher last April, “Is the Media Covering Iraq on the Cheap?” (E&P now behind subscription wall, but full text available here.)

If truth is journalism’s goal, cheapness within journalism undermines it. Embedded reporter Paul McLeary wrote in Columbia Journalism Review not long ago, “In Iraq, the untold stories pile up, one by one by one,” because “there just aren’t enough of them [journalists] to give the conflict its due.”

I followed up with how “Media in Iraq Cheapskates Americans.”

What one news business commentator calls “the news media’s dirty little secrets” is that inexpensive freelancers and locals are heavily used, of sometimes questionable abilities and agenda. A Committee to Protect Journalists article in 2004 on these “fixers” has the Knight Ridder bureau chief in Baghdad saying, “Their work has changed in the last year I’ve been here from making phone calls to going out and covering stories.” The Islamabad bureau chief for Associated Press says, “Their role is changing from a source to a contributor.”
There have been some cases of such locals being suspected of complicity in staging “news” of bombings, or of fabricating news. See here, or here, and here, for examples.
Today’s E&P front-pages James Carroll, former editor at the Los Angeles Times, speaking to the American Society of Newspaper Editors:
Carroll said bluntly that the goal of current newspaper owners is “money, that’s it.”…”It’s not surprising that there is a backlash today against those who are presumed to be gatekeepers.”…[Carroll] noting that too many owners are going for “milking a dying business for all it is worth. The symptoms of harvesting are staring us in the face.” He added that it is “most especially, in high profit margins.” He said that the average newspaper profit margin remains 19.5%.
Another newspaper business analyst points out in The New Yorker, that just sold McClatchy newspaper chain’s “operating margin last year was twenty-eight per cent….newspaper chains have become relentless in their pursuit of cost-cutting. Although much of this has been bad for the art of journalism, it has been very good for the bottom line.”
Those newspaper margins are far higher than those of oil companies, or most any other industry. Talking heads are often paid millions of dollars for their frequent inanity.
Gee, do ya think the press can spare something more than pocket change to serve their customers with the better coverage deserved about the Iraq war?

And the Israel-Hezbollah war, and every other war.

I wrote here, “turning responsibility for what the American people hear to inexpensive Iraqi stringers is simply grossly irresponsible.”

Now that it is literally threatening the immediate survival of Israel it is beyond grossly irresponsible, but criminally negligent.