AP's Conflict of Interest on Bilal Hussein

  • Bookmark and Share

There is one current story in Iraq that has attracted the full attention of the Associated Press, and that is the case of Bilal Hussein, an AP photographer and terrorism suspect. The AP report on Hussein's hearing yesterday leaves out the fact that Hussein was arrested with a known al Qaeda terrorist... one of but many troubling aspects of the news organization's decision to forego objective news reporting in favor of self-serving advocacy in a clear and pervasive conflict of interest.

The Associated Press, as an involved party in this case, should recuse themselves from reporting on Hussein's trial.

According to The Associated Press Statement of News Values and Principles:

In the 21st century, that news is transmitted in more ways than ever before – in print, on the air and on the Web, with words, images, graphics, sounds and video. But always and in all media, we insist on the highest standards of integrity and ethical behavior when we gather and deliver the news.

That means we abhor inaccuracies, carelessness, bias or distortions. It means we will not knowingly introduce false information into material intended for publication or broadcast; nor will we alter photo or image content. Quotations must be accurate, and precise.

It means we always strive to identify all the sources of our information, shielding them with anonymity only when they insist upon it and when they provide vital information – not opinion or speculation; when there is no other way to obtain that information; and when we know the source is knowledgeable and reliable.

It means we don't plagiarize.

It means we avoid behavior or activities that create a conflict of interest and compromise our ability to report the news fairly and accurately, uninfluenced by any person or action.

It means we don't misidentify or misrepresent ourselves to get a story. When we seek an interview, we identify ourselves as AP journalists.

It means we don’t pay newsmakers for interviews, to take their photographs or to film or record them.

It means we must be fair. Whenever we portray someone in a negative light, we must make a real effort to obtain a response from that person. When mistakes are made, they must be corrected – fully, quickly and ungrudgingly.

And ultimately, it means it is the responsibility of every one of us to ensure that these standards are upheld. Any time a question is raised about any aspect of our work, it should be taken seriously.

AP editor Kim Gamel cannot claim to be avoiding bias and a conflict of interest when interviewing AP spokesman Paul Colford about the trial of AP employee Bilal Hussein.

In what alternate universe is it acceptable for a journalist to interview a senior staffer in the same news organization about a fellow employee?

Gamel cannot claim to be objective and retain the ability to "report the news fairly and accurately, uninfluenced by any person or action" when Gamel is reporting upon the Associated Press.

Whether or not Bilal Hussein is guilty of terrorism-related charges is a matter for the Iraqi criminal justice system to decide.

That the Associated Press is in violation of their own stated values and principles is readily apparent.

Just don't expect them to admit it.

Cross-posted at Confederate Yankee.

—Bob Owens is an investigative blogger who writes at Confederate Yankee.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Kim Gamel, Graduate, Goebbles School of Journalism

This is just another example of a news organization that gives lip service to the truth. I don't think Gamel would know journalistic ethics if it jumped up and bit her tush. She is another fine graduate of the Goebbles School of Journalism. And if she isn't comfortable with that, how about Member, Ideological Department.

Media Terrorists

I will go back to what the liberal press DOES NOT WANT EXPOSED in Bilial Hussein and that is the FACT all of them are being fed terrorist information directly from terrorists.

I want to remind readers of the fact that CBS's Laura Logan on her weblog was carrying unedited al Qaeda footage of them mass murdering people. This got some play, but the only way Logan got this foot raw footage is if her cameraman was there. In simple terms, it means CBS like all news bodies has a symbiotic relationship with terrorists.

Terrorists are well tapped into news groups. I would even go so far that the Bob Woodruff story so milked by ABC, him and his ditzy wife was aimed directly at him for the purpose of propaganda. Terrorists just did not happen to have a bomb planted where he like an idiot got out and did his report. Someone tipped the terrorists off and if you recall CBS also had a reporterette brain dinged at the same time.
That was an operation designed specifically to nail the top American liberal reporters to get publicity. It was all a set up.

Logan and others are more "sympathetic" to the terrorist cause as of late and if you notice in Green Zone hiding they are quite safe and feed remarkable and friendly feeds.........or they did until the US cracked down and shot all their murderous news creating leads.

I want people to get this point too.........THE REASON NEWS HAS STOPPED IN IRAQ is not just because the news is good, but BECAUSE LOGAN AND THE LIBERAL MEDIA HAD ALL THEIR SOURCES FEEDING THEM PROPAGANDA KILLED BY US MILITARY OPERATIONS.

I repeat that the stories out of Iraq stopped because the terrorists which the media were in bed with are now dead and not feeding them feature murder stories any more.

Once again a Newsbuster exclusive breaking story. Would be nice if editors here would follow up a Lame Cherry lead.

 

*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS

Lame C ..... Interestng theory

As you say..."THE REASON NEWS HAS STOPPED IN IRAQ is not just because the news is good, but BECAUSE LOGAN AND THE LIBERAL MEDIA HAD ALL THEIR SOURCES FEEDING THEM PROPAGANDA KILLED BY US MILITARY OPERATIONS."

This is as plausable an explanation as any MSM story that we have had to digest on a daily basis.  Certainly the Reduction in "Terrorists" in general has denied the MSM of their Daily Diet of IED's and Military deaths.

NBC had to swallow hard and slowly the "Support the Troops" ad this last weekend, certainly this fact lends credibility as to whose side the MSM is taking in the Iraq War.

As Bush said, If you're not with us on fighting Terrorism, Then you're on side of the Terrorists.     

 

What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ?   David Foote  GoE

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.