Michelle Malkin called it like this: NEWSWEEK LIED: PEOPLE DIED

BlackFive called it like this: THE SONG REMAINS THE SAME

And the “Today” show? Well, their cutting analysis was “Some red faces at Newsweek this morning…”

Newsweek’s response? They “regret” the violence, the deaths, the complete turkey of a story, but won’t retract it. Basically, “oops.”

Unbelievable. 15+ dead, a hundred injured, mayhem and calls for a holy war with a three-day deadline on response to the Muslim world from the White House, and it’s “oops?”

For those of you who haven’t seen Newsweek’s (non)apology for their complete and utter irresponsibility, here are some of the good bits:

“Did a report in NEWSWEEK set off a wave of deadly anti-American riots in Afghanistan? That's what numerous news accounts suggested last week as angry Afghans took to the streets to protest reports, linked to us, that U.S. interrogators had desecrated the Qur'an while interrogating Muslim terror suspects. We were as alarmed as anyone to hear of the violence, which left at least 15 Afghans dead and scores injured. But I think it's important for the public to know exactly what we reported, why, and how subsequent events unfolded.”

Translation: It is our fault? Of course not. We had every right to go to press with a story any idiot could have known would have disastrous results, without any significant effort to confirm it.

“Their information came from a knowledgeable U.S. government source, and before deciding whether to publish it we approached two separate Defense Department officials for comment.”

Translation: Although (1) one declined to comment at all because they had ABSOLUTELY no idea what the heck we were talking about and know full well via captured materials that Al Qaeda tells operatives to make up charges like this hoping the American media will vomit it out upon their pages, and (2) the other did challenge one detail, but didn’t have any requisite knowledge upon which to base conclusions on the story as a whole, AND (3) the DoD has found other such allegations to lack credibility, we decided to run it anyway.

"Although other major news organizations had aired charges of Qur'an desecration based only on the testimony of detainees, we believed our story was newsworthy because a U.S. official said government investigators turned up this evidence."

Translation: If Al-Jazeera and the Russians were running these stories, that’s good enough for us.

Newsweek has this to say today: How a Fire Broke Out

I’ve got news for you. This one didn’t “break out.” This one was set – journalistic arson. Newsweek made a choice to throw common sense and ethics out the window.

Mark Whitaker’s non-apology, and Newsweek’s refusal to retract the story, speak volumes about the fact that there isn’t a whole lot of genuine regret there. While Mr. Whitaker threw a bone to the U.S. troops who may well see a surge of terrorist activity thanks to Newsweek’s irresponsibility, saying that you “extend your sympathies” to the dead and to the U.S. troops who may have to pay the price for it doesn’t cut it in my book.

You want to apologize? You sincerely regret what you did? Well, then, how about donating any proceeds from that issue, and the one in which you had to "apologize," to charities that help the troops you’ve undoubtedly put at more risk. Donate your proceeds to the Fisher House, to Homes for Our Troops, to Keystone Soldiers, to Soldiers’ Angels, to AnySoldier, to the Freedom Alliance. Buy GI bracelets for your entire staff, and then some. Help the families of those killed in the violence you helped create. Do something.

As a kid, one of the best lessons my parents ever taught me was that there are consequences to things that you do. Don’t finish your veggies, you don’t get to go outside and play after dinner. Don’t do your chores, no allowance.

Run a non-vetted story that kills people, nearly gets the entire Muslim world calling a Jihad against all Americans because of it, and in all likelihood increases the risk to US troops, and all you have to do is say “oops”? That’s just plain wrong. Newsweek ought to have some sort of consequence for their actions.

They, in a move typical of the MSM, hopped right on the latest Anti-American bandwagon, fueling the flames of Bush-hating, troop-hating, American-hating fundamentalists, and likely more level-headed Muslims as well, by running a story about the desecration of a holy book - a crime punishable by death in the Muslim world. They did it without a whole lot of hesitation. Why wait? Do I think they wanted people to die? No. But do I think that they ran it without due diligence because it fits with their agenda, and because it clearly jibes with the whole American-soldiers-as-torturers motif? You bet. And this all comes at a time when you now actually have a UCONN poll conducted by the Roper Center coming out that say that although 72% of journalists believe the media reports accurately, only 39% of the average Americans surveyed thought the same. (Coincidentally, almost the same percentage of surveyed journalists say they voted for Kerry - 68%) Although a little more than half of the surveyed average Americans believe that stories that rely solely on anonymous sources should not be published (53%), only 14% of journalists agreed. Gee, why do we think people are losing faith in the MSM....?

Cheat-seeking Missiles, a blog I found today, calls it "manslaughter for politics." Pretty much dead-on, as far as I'm concerned.

The bloggers have long been speaking about the culpability of the MSM for what they set in motion. Collectively, we've been warning that this kind of thing can get people killed. Newsweek's latest just proves it more clearly than most.

The White House is calling for a retraction of the story. I’m calling for more than that. I think Newsweek ought to take an overt step to apologize to the people they maligned with this drivel. I think they ought to do something to actively support those they and the rest of the liberal media undercut at just about every opportunity.

Put your money where your mouth is, Whitaker.

Side Note: Interesting tidbit about bloggers in the UCONN survey - 59% of the surveyed journalists believed that blogs were not a "legitimate" source of news. Only 13% considered bloggers journalists (so only 13% decided to insult us). At least they did throw us a bone - 85% of them said we should be protected under the First Amendment. Kind of scary is the fact that 15% felt that bloggers should NOT be!

linked with Mudville Gazette's Open Post

Labels: media coverage, My Two Cents, opinion