Los Angeles Times Watch: Big Media Journalists Often Rely on Sources That Are Unreliable
Patterico (Via Hugh Hewitt): Is the L.A. Times Repeating Enemy Propaganda? Or Is There Another Reason The Paper Is Getting Basic Facts Wrong and Failing to Report the Military’s Side?
Conclusion:
In doing so, I found I learned something important about reporting from Iraq in general. Big Media journalists often rely on sources that are unreliable. They don’t tell you the pressures these sources might be under from insurgents and terrorists. They refuse to tell you who their stringers are, so we can assess their motivations. They get quotes from doctors who seem to see only civilian deaths. If the military has been given insufficient time to respond to an allegation, these journalists don’t check with the military later, to verify that the story they’ve written is accurate. And sometimes, as here, their stories are completely at odds with numerous other accounts reported in other press outlets — and they seem to have no interest in finding out why.
It’s very sobering to realize that much of the news coming out of Iraq is completely unreliable. And it’s a bigger issue than whether the L.A. Times got a single story wrong on November 15.
Hugh Hewitt has it RIGHT:
Any self-respecting newspaper would launch an internal investigation of this story. Keep in mind that the paper did such an internal investigation when the famous Staples Center controversy erupted. That story concerned crossing the lines between news and advertising.
This story concerns crossing the lines between America and its enemies. Let’s hope the paper is at least as concerned about the latter as it was about the former.
Indeed and the Tribune Company wonders why the Los Angeles Times circulation is in a declining spiral?
Blogosphere:
Technorati Tags: LosAngelesTimes, Iraq, IraqWar, Ramadi
One Comment
K T Cat
They’re working for the enemy. No question about it.