{"id":238,"date":"2008-04-03T11:37:36","date_gmt":"2008-04-03T16:37:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stonescryout.org\/?p=238"},"modified":"2008-04-03T11:38:24","modified_gmt":"2008-04-03T16:38:24","slug":"co-dependence-in-the-press","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stonescryout.org\/?p=238","title":{"rendered":"Co-Dependence in the Press"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Columbia Journalism Review, no member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy ™ they, is calling out the press corps<\/a> on their (lack of) coverage of a pretty blatant lie.  First they repeat the context in which John McCain said we may stay in Iraq for 100 years, picking a number out of the air while noting our lengthy, continuing presence in S. Korea (~50 years) and Japan (~60).  But then came the lie about it.<\/p>\n

\n

It’s clear from this that McCain isn’t saying he’d support continuing the war for one hundred years, only that it might be necessary to keep troops there that long. That’s a very different thing. As he says, we’ve had troops in South Korea for over fifty years, but few people think that means we’re still fighting the Korean War.<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, back in February, Obama said: “We are bogged down in a war that John McCain now suggests might go on for another hundred years.”<\/p>\n

And, on a separate occasion: “(McCain) says that he is willing to send our troops into another hundred years of war in Iraq.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

But the big deal for the CJR is that journalists aren’t journaling.  If their job is to report the facts, they’re derelict.  Instead, they’re burying the lead or completely ignoring it, becoming co-dependents.<\/p>\n

\n

Still, some outlets continue to portray the issue as a he-said, she-said spat. A long takeout<\/a> on the controversy by ABC News<\/i>, opining that McCain’s comment “handed his Democratic opponents and war critics a weapon with which to bludgeon him,” is headlined: “McCain’s 100 Year Remark Hands Ammo to War Critics: McCain Haunted by January Remarks Suggesting 100 More Years in Iraq.” And today’s L.A. Times<\/i> story<\/a>, headlined “Obama, McCain Bicker Over Iraq,” is similarly neutral. <\/p>\n

To be fair, the ABC News<\/i> piece does provide the quote in its full context, giving enough information to allow conscientious readers to figure out the truth. That’s better than the L.A. Times<\/i> piece, which says only that “McCain has stressed since then that he meant that U.S. troops might need to remain to support Iraqi forces, not to wage full-scale warfare”—instead of simply telling readers that it’s clear from the context that McCain did indeed mean that. Still, neither piece stated high up and unequivocally that Obama is distorting McCain’s words.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

(Emphasis mine.)  When those who lean left can’t keep quiet about leftward bias in the press (and when they make their case in a journalism<\/em> magazine), the game is up<\/p>\n

[tags]media,Columbia Journalism Review,John McCain,Barack Obama,Iraq,media bias[\/tags]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Columbia Journalism Review, no member of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy ™ they, is calling out the press corps on their (lack of) coverage of a pretty blatant lie.  First they repeat the context in which John McCain said we may stay in Iraq for 100 years, picking a number out of the air while […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9,22,26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-238","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-doug","category-media","category-politics"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t