« Down With The MSM ... And Their Acronym | Main | CapitolLink: The Facts About Spying »

Pressuring The Post For A Correction

The Washington Post still has not responded, at least not officially, to allegations that its Dec. 26 article on military bloggers was filled with inaccuracies, but bloggers are demanding corrections.

Much of the article, which argued that the military is using bloggers embedded with U.S. troops to spread propaganda about the war in Iraq, was dedicated to the work of "milblogger" Bill Roggio of The Fourth Rail and ThreatsWatch. Roggio noted "flaws" in the article, including factual ones, a day after it ran, but the newspaper has not run a correction.

Michelle Malkin is leading the charge against the Post. The liberal blog Raw Story also has been following the story.

"Bloggers on the right and left should remain united in forcing Post reporters Jonathan Finer and Douglas Struck and their editors to address their errors and misrepresentations," Malkin wrote yesterday in a post that reprinted the newspaper's correction policy and contact information.

One of Malkin's readers apparently received a written response from Post ombudsman Deborah Howell. She said the paper's editors have had trouble contacting the reporters in Iraq but added that "there will be an answer."

Milblogger Blackfive took a tough stance against the paper for going so long without a correction. "I've got friends at the WashPo," he wrote. "Unfortunately, I have no choice but to avoid reading it. I suggest you do the same."

UPDATE: Instapundit Glenn Reynolds is on the case, too. Among other things, he linked to a call for "veteran volunteers" to help milblogger Michael Yon build a new publication called Frontline Forum.

"Now that I'm back in the United States for a time ... it's become clear that in just under a year, the media gap has morphed into a chasm," Yon said. "Before this thing becomes a black hole, it's time for a few good men and women to put their military experience and expertise to use in an operation that can create an alternative channel that will allow frontline information to break through and be heard."

Reynolds also quoted at length an e-mail from a reader who thinks the military bears some blame for the current state of reporting on the war because the Pentagon does not include blogs in its information loop. "The Bush administration has said that the support of the American people is a strategic center of gravity in winning the war," the reader said, "and I believe the best method today is the use of blogs to meet that end. [The Defense Department] needs to use the best means possible to reach the American people, and blogs are it."

Posted by | 10:09 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://amcblog.nationaljournal.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/422

Comments

I think the problem is that we expect too much from the Washington Post. They are probably the best MSM newspaper in the country, and if they describe a person's function accurately, attribute a quote properly, and spell a name correctly I consider it unreasonable to expect much more from them. How many times have I seen an incorrect phone # in their classified ads? Merchants and citizens who actually PAY to be in the paper? ("Oh, we'll run it for you again next week for free." "But by then, the sale/event/deadline will be over!")

Bad headline? The editor writes that, not the reporter, and it may have no real connection with the article. Compared to some, Roggio has nothing to complain about; Natan Sharansky believes that an inaccurate Washington Post headline sent him to the Soviet Gulag for thirteen years!

No, the Post's standards just aren't that high. The correct posture is not to accept anything they print too seriously, and to doubt anything even slightly complicated until, from double-checking, you can gauge the reliability of individual reporters yourself.

As for whether they are pro-this or pro-that: this newspaper has a way to go before I'd want the endorsement of their opinion.

If they want to change, they should get the facts straight first, and write the opinion/spin separately afterwards. Nothing wrong with that approach. If it uses more column-inches the deadlines of other reporters can be stretched a little.

Solomon2 | 01.08.06 03:45 PM

Post a Comment