Monday, May 16, 2005

Newsweek published this story in which they accuse US forces as desecrating the Quran to upset prisoners in Guantanamo. They must not have put much effort into vetting this rumor, because now they are backing off, apologizing for any mistakes they made in printing the story. This is only after several anti-American riots and some deaths occured in Afghanistan and other Muslim areas. I'd have to say it's almost treasonous to print unproven stuff like this that is so incendiary while in the middle of the war. Whose side is Newsweek on? I would have no problem with them printing this story if they had some sort of verification, but with them backing off the story, they are implicitly admitting that they did not. If not treasonous, it's certainly highly irresponsible, and now people are dead as a direct effect, and many of our allies in the Muslim world have probably lost trust in us.

For shame, Newsweek, whose side are you on? If there was a similar story about Muslim's desecrating Bibles, you can be darn sure they verify it, because they would not want to insult Muslims. Our own press seems to have no problem embarrassing us, however.

4 Comments:

At 10:59 AM, Mike said...

Newsweek lied! Kids Died!

Sometimes I think they make this stuff up so everyone gets pissed off and riots and then they have something real to cover.

 
At 3:47 PM, Anonymous said...

Take a look. They are not retracting the reprt at all. They are reporting that one of their sources is backing away from the report. That is very different. They apparently had a report and then a confirmation, and now the confirmation is retracting.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/15/AR2005051500605.html

 
At 4:23 PM, Dave said...

Not sure how to add this pic, but check this one out that's currently posted..
http://news.yahoo.com/fc/World/Media_Watch

It shows 2 Muslim guys, 1 holding a sign saying "Bush Should Apologize for Desecration of Quran" and the other one says "Newsweek Deserves to be Banned"

I'm a little confused by this; Why ban the magazine that reports a story that, if true, you would really want to know (as a Muslim)? And if it is not true, then why should Bush apologize? I guess protesters are like the t-shirt vendors at big sports tournaments; they make signs or t-shirts for both possible outcomes. I guess these guys didn't coordinate their signs when protesting!

As for the story itself...no comment, but Newsweek does have a good reputation as a reliable and thorough, non-partisan source.

 
At 8:31 AM, Ben said...

The editor of Newsweek, Evan Thomas, said during the run-up to the election "that of course the mainstream media is biased left, and he expects the media will garner Kerry an extra 15%. http://instapundit.com/archives/016534.php

EVen the editor of Newsweek says they are biased, so Dave, this reputation you are hearing about is wrong.

Besides, this is about more than not liking Bush, this put Americans in harm's way, when they only had the word of one official who is obviously waffling. Everytime something happens, everyone starts spouting about how Bush needs accountability. The media, on the other hand, jsut gets some excuses made for it, and moves on. The guy who wrote the story said, "I've expressed regret the people killed." That's horseshit. People were killed because you didn't fully vet an explosive story because you'll print anything that makes look Bush bad, print first, ask questions later, unless it makes Bush look good, then bury it. You need to express more than regret.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home