As NewsBusters previewed here and here, CBS’s “60 Minutes” aired a segment Sunday dealing with a small group of American troops that have signed a petition called “Appeal For Redress.” Simply put, these soldiers want U.S. troops to come home from Iraq immediately.
Unfortunately, the piece exaggerated the size of this group, while also misrepresenting military opinion of the war (video available here courtesy of Ms Underestimated, approximate transcript available here courtesy of CBSNews.com).
CBS’s Steve Kroft introduced the segment:
Tonight you’ll hear dissension in the ranks from a large group of soldiers and marines who are fed up and have decided to go public. They’re not going AWOL, they're not disobeying orders or even refusing to fight in Iraq. But as correspondent Lara Logan reports, they are doing something unthinkable to many in uniform: bypassing the chain of command to denounce a war they’re in the middle of fighting.
Notice that Kroft said “a large group of soldiers and marines.” However, he didn’t give an actual number. In fact, having watched the entire segment, and examined CBS’s approximate transcript, I can’t identify that the actual number of dissenters was ever revealed by Kroft, Logan, or any involved in the story.
Now, the CBS News website stated in its sub-headline concerning the story: “More Than 1,000 Military Personnel Sign Petition Urging Withdrawal.” This seems to be a fair approximation based on estimates I’ve read. However, it does seem rather disingenuous of CBS to categorize this group as “large” when it appears to be less than one percent of those currently in Iraq.
Yet, such statistics were never addressed in this report. Instead, at one point Logan cherry-picked a December 2006 Military Times survey:
According to a recent Military Times survey, many in uniform feel the same way. The poll found that for the first time ever more US soldiers oppose the president’s handling of the war in Iraq than support it.
Curiously, there were other elements of this same survey Logan chose not to share with her viewers. For instance, 41 percent of troops questioned felt that it was correct for the U.S. to go to war in Iraq, as opposed to 37 percent who felt it was a mistake. That seems to be much more important than how these folks feel about the president’s handling of the war.
Furthermore, 50 percent of respondents felt that the U.S. is either somewhat or very likely to succeed in Iraq, compared to 41 percent who felt success is either not very or not at all likely.
Beyond this, 52 percent of respondents approved of the job George W. Bush is doing as president, compared to only 31 percent who disapproved.
Finally, and maybe most important considering the subject of this piece, only thirteen percent of those surveyed felt that there should be zero troops in Iraq and Kuwait. Again, pertaining to this piece, since Logan referenced this poll, wouldn’t it have been pertinent to show that a complete troop withdrawal is a clear minority view?
By contrast, thirteen percent of respondents felt the current number of troops was fine, while 22 percent said the number should be increased to between 146,000 and 200,000. And, sixteen percent said that there should be more than 200,000 troops in country.
As such, almost four times as many of our troops felt that current troop levels in Iraq and Kuwait were correct or should be increased versus those that wanted a complete withdrawal. In fact, almost three times as many troops supported a surge versus a withdrawal.
Sadly, CBS didn’t choose to share such data with its viewers. Anybody want to guess why?
*****Update: There was more of this Military Times poll that Logan and CBS chose to ignore that I wanted to share. Another segment dealt with morale. Such might have been quite pertinent to the story "60 Minutes" aired, wouldn't you agree?
For instance, 83 percent of the troops said they were either completely or somewhat satisfied with their job. By contrast, only fifteen percent were somewhat or completely dissatisfied.
81 percent said they would recommend a military career to others, while only 14 percent said they wouldn't.
72 percent said they would support a son or daughter's decision to enter the military. Only 22 percent said they wouldn't.
66 percent said they would re-enlist, or, if an officer, extend their commitment. Only 21 percent said they wouldn't.
90 percent agreed or strongly agreed that they were well trained . Only nine percent disagreed or strongly disagreed.
Finally, this might be the most interesting finding:
48 percent agreed or strongly agreed that President Bush had their best interests at heart, compared to 40 percent who disagreed or strongly disagreed. By contrast, only 23 percent agreed or strongly agreed that Congress had their best interests at heart, compared to 69 percent who either disagreed or strongly disagreed.
Why do you think CBS and Logan withheld all of this from their viewers as they depicted a demoralized military seeking withdrawal from Iraq and with no confidence in the president?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Screw the stats. What I'm boi
February 25, 2007 - 22:09 ET by ThisnThatScrew the stats. What I'm boiled at is the phrase "large group of solders and marines who are fed up". That's pure imflamatory. In one phrase, CBS has pumped in loads of bias and emotion, knowing full well that no one had been invited to speak that could refute their words.
How dare CBS put forth a small group of people and then try to imply that these people represent a trend or a majority of opinion from our military???! CBS is using this hit piece as exactly that. CBS has an agenda and they are wearing that agenda on their sleeve. This whole piece is a slander on our military and our enemies are cheering. CBS has now provided a lot more encouragement to the terrorists, and they should feel embarrased. Shame, shame on that organization.
The worst part is -- they didn't have to do this. But, they chose to go ahead with it, no matter how imbalanced it is.
"What I'm boiled at is t
February 25, 2007 - 22:13 ET by ckc1227"What I'm boiled at is the phrase "large group of solders and marines who are fed up"
Ironically, if they were discussing islamofascism, they would have said only a small group of the religion of peace actually hates America and Israel, lol.
Reminder: Don't forget to pay your taxes. 12 million illegal immigrants are counting on you.
TnT, CBS and the drive-by-med
February 26, 2007 - 08:32 ET by Senior ChiefTnT,
CBS and the drive-by-media are dishonest and biased as usual. I didn't watch the show, since the whole were still attending church services (came home just in time for FOX's 1/2 Hour Newshour). I am one of those majority who approve of what we're doing in the middle east that CBS didn't invite. I may not be there at this time, but rest assure, my spirit and so does the super-majority of my comrades in arms are with our troops in harms way. Those who were invited and were able to voiced CBS propaganda did a disservice to our troops and don't deserve to wear the military uniforms again. As far as I know, those are punishable under the UCMJ. Subverting authority and disobeying lawful order, during this time of war, to me, is considered aiding and abeting (sp) to the enemies. If these folks ever get into politics someday, think of Murtha and Kerry.
Speaking of FOX's 1/2 Hour Newshour, that show is funny. Though re-run, I'll watch it over again. I move the motion to produce more of that show, anybody out there want to second this motion. This time however, more hard punches please. The "commercials" in between, need to expand beyond ACLU. How about NEA/Teachers Union, NAMBLA, leftist judges, abortion advocates and so on...
"This seems to be a fair
February 25, 2007 - 22:19 ET by Galvanic"This seems to be a fair approximation based on estimates I’ve read. However, it does seem rather disingenuous of CBS to categorize this group as “large” when it appears to be less than one percent of those currently in Iraq."
I was thinking exactly the same thing as I watched this piece on 60 Minutes tonight. Once again, the MSM ignores perspective when it doesn't serve their purposes. They deliberately use ambiguous words like "large" while avoiding totals, so viewers won't think that the dissenters are limited to the handful on camera.
Honest reporting would have covered the rest of the survey results.
Large Number of troops
February 26, 2007 - 15:59 ET by BufordAccording to the "Appeal for Redress" website a whopping 1430 Active, Reserve and Guard members have signed the petition.
Out of a multi-million man military that number is miniscule.
Just another reason why I haven't watched 60 Minutes since the '70s.
The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program...........Ronald Reagan
Large Number of troops
February 26, 2007 - 15:59 ET by BufordOOPS! shakey trigger finger.
I think I've figured it out
February 25, 2007 - 22:35 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveI think I've figured it out...
The liberal media seeks out these minute pockets of people that hold a minority opinion or seem to be swimming against popular opinion, and the media decides "these people don't have a voice...it's our job to give them that voice." No matter how absurd or outrageous their claims are, they go to air with it and make these groups seem much large than they really are. The media also tries to make the rest of us feel sorry for these groups and make us feel bad if we disagree with them. It's just sickening that people fall for it. People will be talking about this crap at the water coolers and few (if any) won't question the details of the claims, they'll take it as fact and spread it in future conversations.
As for those soldiers, they should be ashamed of themselves. They are lucky nothing will happen to them within their chain of command (or otherwise)--all because they were so public about it. I worked with a guy that got the 3rd degree from our chain of command for writing to his congressman (after he gave our chain of command serveral chances to handle his issue). These soldiers unfortunately will not be held accountable just as they are asking of the administration.
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
Yeah, but if this theory we
February 25, 2007 - 22:38 ET by sarcasmoYeah, but if this theory were totally-true, they'd give equal voice to Dr. Ron Paul & Dennis Kucinich. Like it or not, I've proved right-here beyond a doubt that they don't, and that it's a result of obvious antilibertarian mediabias.
JMR
That may be, but the proble
February 25, 2007 - 23:50 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveThat may be, but the problem with Kucinich is that nobody wants to hear him in the first place.
Of course they have to pick the story that might get the most viewers. And something that "pulls the heartstrings" or otherwise gets to people's "feelings" will be shown before any thing that takes thought--like politics.
I know you feel strongly about Dr. Paul and Kucinich, but until you can get them a heart-wrenching angle to voice their stance, then the media just isn't going to help them out at all.
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
You've missed my point, the
February 26, 2007 - 03:35 ET by sarcasmoYou've missed my point, the media obviously want to hear Dennis our they wouldn't have been fawning ALL OVER "constant coverage" Kucinich for the past 6 weeks. I have yet to let me see Dr. Paul on TV even once. That's gonna change tonight on Lou Dobbs' show, though (see how my full-court press here has finally paid-off, even if it didn't shame Fox News into doing their jobs? Lou's Fox's competiton, and I'm switchin'over tonight! Markets in action!)! And as I've said, Dr. Paul's heart wrenching angle is that he actually fathered Anna Nicole's baby, or at least his falsely claiming that might cause the news media to inadvertently do their jobs.
JMR
Noel: The Military Times &quo
February 25, 2007 - 22:47 ET by Del DolemonteNoel:
The Military Times "poll" is worthless. The "Military Times" franchise these days is owned by Gannett (same owner of USA Today).
In addition, they have done "polls" in the past that used totally suspect polling methodology. Namely, they "polled" their subscribers (as opposed to the total military population)-by MAIL. That polling method was used in the 1920s, not today. Obviously, they were after a pre-determined result.
Del
February 25, 2007 - 23:03 ET by Noel SheppardDel,
Thanks for the input. This is what they report at their website about their poll: "On Nov. 13, we mailed questionnaires to 6,000 people drawn at random from our list of active-duty subscribers. The annual poll has come to be viewed by some as a barometer of the professional career military."
I have nothing to base the value of this poll on. However, if CBS is willing to cherry-pick from it, I believe it's fair to point out its other findings. ns
Noel the CBS poll
February 26, 2007 - 04:40 ET by SportPoliticsNoel the CBS poll, CBS calls that sexing up the intelligence to lie their way out of a war. Funny how they can do it all they want, get absolutely caught, but for the lefty turds, that's ok.
Then, on the other hand, the same turdmunchers, claim Bush did it but have zero evidence. Instead the idiot liberals relied on one word to argue over in a brit opinion report from a sit in, and pretended the democrats hadn't said the same thing since 1998, and pretended Bush had exclusive dissemination and control of intel.
It's just absolutely amazing. The press has the right and the duty to sex up their intel poll and lie to all of us, and of course the left - one and the same - same as the democrats, runs with their demand and their sexed up lying spew.
Thanks for providing us with the information that makes a judgement in this matter so simple. CBS lied, lied big once again.
I've been in the military f
February 25, 2007 - 23:54 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveI've been in the military for almost 11 years now. I do see the Military Times on the newstand at the BX/Commissary, but I don't know many people that actually buy it. I have seen it around in offices from time to time. The few times I actually picked up one and thumbed through it, it seemed to be quite worthless...much like the USA Today.
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
These aren't a large number
February 25, 2007 - 23:13 ET by terrigThese aren't a large number no matter what the Crap Broadcasting Service says. They need to look into another thing called the Appeal for Courage which has 1092 activity members signed on since Monday. Hubby is proud to be one of them. Here is the web address for active duty military: http://www.appealforcourage.org/. These individuals are a few whiners who are that 10% who don't like what they do.
Troops
February 26, 2007 - 00:37 ET by Gordon SchumwayNotice that Kroft said “a large group of soldiers and marines.”
However, he didn’t give an actual number. In fact, having watched the
entire segment, and examined CBS’s approximate transcript, I can’t
identify that the actual number of dissenters was ever revealed by
Kroft, Logan, or any involved in the story.
I counted ten.
Gordo
Melmac
Of Course CBS Showed What They Wanted To Show
February 26, 2007 - 01:31 ET by emjem24I find it an utter disgrace what these folks are doing.They may be "appealing for redress" by asking Congress to oppose the war but they know that they're a minority and that their pr stunt will do more harm than good to both themselves and their comrades.Some of these yahoos are already out of the military so they are no longer engaged in the current realities of war.
As a military spouse, I've also seen the Military Times poll mentioned time and time again like it's real scientific proof that the military is going to up and revolt against the Iraq War. Here's some interesting things I've discovered about the Military Times:
1. The Military Times and all its incarnations (Air Force Times, Army Times, Marine Times, and Navy Times) is owned by the Gannette Company which owns USA Today (part of the MSM)
2. Many people who participate in these "surveys" always seem to be cherry picked younger troops and those who feel the most disenfranchised and disenchanted (the where's mine? crowd of people) who post the negative responses
3. A lot of military people I know don't subscribe to the Military Times newspapers and those currently subscribed have already cancelled their subscriptions or are considering it
4. The staff at the Military Times newspapers are overwhelmingly civilian reporters with no background military knowlege. They know not what they report.
Given all of this, how are we to believe any MSM outlet who uses the Military Times polls to support their assertion that there is a large number of active duty military who want out of Iraq? Hmmm...think about it
The difficult we do immediately; the impossible takes a little longer. Air Force Motto
emjem says: When your brain's stuck on liberalism it self-destructs.
Isn't there a military newspa
February 26, 2007 - 06:17 ET by BAUHAUSIsn't there a military newspaper writen by the Military itself? I mean you have AFN (at least here in Europe), why no own newspaper?
On the military and their own journalists
February 26, 2007 - 06:41 ET by UnsaneThe bases each have their own newspapers, and there is the Stars and Stripes, which has some military-centered coverage (but is mostly a composite of stories using the same wire services any other newspaper would use).
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Even I have to admit bias her
February 26, 2007 - 02:47 ET by mostlymoderateEven I have to admit bias here. No matter what the occupation is, if you look hard enough you are likely to find some very disgruntled employee's in any line of work. The military is no different. Now if CBS could legitimately show that half or more of all troops wanted to cut and run, then I would be ALL FOR IT! That is clearly not the case.
Exactly, mostlymoderate. One
February 26, 2007 - 13:17 ET by QueenMumExactly, mostlymoderate. One could find a "large" group of disgruntled high school students in any local school district. Should one then conclude from whatever their complaints that high school education in the U.S. should end immediately?
Thanks for the stats Noel
February 26, 2007 - 04:28 ET by SportPoliticsLet's see, those they interviewed (3) started 8:30 seconds into a 12 minute spiel. It lasted about 30 seconds. Then they cut back to the 8 or ten crowd in their studios.Oh, sorry, TEN- plus the 2 founders - 12. 12 vs 3. You're brilliant you goofball. They gave Tony Snow a few moments, then kissy facetime back on the disgruntled.
I note one dumba** said " We can't be there a thousand years." Yes, that's a bright young moron, a thousand years. What a babbling idiot.
I guess you call that a balanced report, because you're a pinhead.
Thanks to Noel for the stats laid out, instead of the redwashing defeatist rhetoric and lies I heard on the liefest spin from british blondie. Pinheads should read those stats.
It absolutely was a hit piece
February 26, 2007 - 08:18 ET by SmartypantsIt absolutely was a hit piece, because CBS started with a predisposed theme, as is standard operating procedure, and used information which supported it. As someone else in this string pointed out, there are disgruntled workers in virtually every line of work on this planet, probably in larger numbers than what CBS found in the military. It is not fun over there, I'm sure, and there has to be a high level of frustration for many. So what? Is that evidence of anything really? CBS could have just as easily, for intance, done a story on how, despite all the hardship, most of the military personnel remain committed to the cause. Yet, you and I know we'll never see a story like that from CBS, or NBC or ABC or CNN for that matter.
Bandini - let's see 'fair and balanced' um... Ok.
February 26, 2007 - 09:50 ET by acaiguanaBandini - let's see 'fair and balanced' um... Ok.
1. CBS made an editorial decision to air a show centered about 12 individuals who are saying they disagree that the US should be in Iraq.
2. One said, "When did that become the standard. We can't be there a thousand years." (or words to that effect when referring to the consequences of a disaster in Iraq should the US pull out)
3. Great number of... (no citation, no source other than the self-serving groups' petition).
4. No sense of context whatsoever in the role these people actually play in their larger role as members of units in the Military.
5. No context with respect to the background of the group itself.
This wasn't a rag-tag group of people put together on the spur of some 'grassroots' moment and paraded in front of America for some purpose vaguely described as 'news'.
This was a sophisticated organization, Appeal for Redress', that was funded by George Soros through straw man organizations; prolmugated by Fenton Communicatons which makes its living catering to fringe political movements and obscene groups opposed to America; and which is staffed by two ex-military members whose backgrounds in the military are totally unknown, except one served two (2) 'combat' tours in Iraq.
I'll tell you what.
In Vietnam we suffered the same sort of sophisticated orchestration of public opinion, except it was actually funded and backed by elements of the KGB.
I've been here and done this before. Since Iraq doesn't have a draft; the opposition forces are now trying crap like this. Can't get college students in the streets or out on the campus burning buildings and getting shot like at Kent State without a draft.
Those guys are too busy with IPods and file sharing.
So, take your, 'absolutely not a hit piece' assertion out for a walk. I think it needs to use the potty.
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)
We All Know What Bandi Is, ACA
February 26, 2007 - 10:13 ET by emjem24ACA...
Not only does Bandi's "absolutely not a hit piece" need to use the potty it needs a reality and truth check.
We all know what this "Bandi" person trully is, ACA. A troll. A disingenuous, ignorant, liberal talking points troll.
I thought I'd seen it all on NB but when Bandini contends how Crappy and Biased Selections is fair and balanced that's like saying that Anna Nicole was a Mensa member.
Trolls come in many disguises. They come disguised as misguided liberals, open-minded environuts, and one issue achilles heel conservatives/Republicans or RINO's. Plus the true Daily K "news analysists." They all have something in common...their devotion to how all NBers "misunderstand" them and are "mean."
The difficult we do immediately; the impossible takes a little longer. Air Force Motto
emjem says: When your brain's stuck on liberalism it self-destructs.
Don't You Need To Pay Up, Bandi?
February 26, 2007 - 10:03 ET by emjem24Bandini...
Don't you think you should pay up on that wager you made the other day with a certain blogger we all know?
You do know that you're wrong, right? I'd like to know where the balance was because from where I'm sitting, there was none. Oh, and the misuse of the Military Times polls was a sign of how balanced Crappy and Biased Selections trully is, right?
I'd like to see you convince this military spouse how the MSM support the mission and troops and I'd like you to give me proof. Now.
Oh, and you've been exposed for the ignorant, liberal sympathizing troll we can all readily identify and ridicule. I'd like an apology for your idiotic and ignorant worship of the MSM. I won't hold my breath since I'm sure you won't admit you were wrong and were disengenous about this story from the start.
The difficult we do immediately; the impossible takes a little longer. Air Force Motto
emjem says: When your brain's stuck on liberalism it self-destructs.
These people are disgraceful
February 26, 2007 - 07:52 ET by King of the BritonsThese people are disgraceful and should be ashamed of themselves. If the rules allow them to petition Congress, no problem. But to go on 60 (Biased) Minutes and whine about the war is wrong. They volunteered for the military. There is no clause in an enlistment contract or a commission that states "valid only in cases where the enlistee or officer agrees with the policies of the U.S. Government." If you want the news story here, spend more time interviewing these people's company mates, ship mates, peers, subordinates, and superiors and find out what kind of soldiers/sailors/marines they are. From my experience (Infantry CO CDR in Afghanistan, still on active duty) these people are despised within the ranks (despised not being a strong enough word). I can tell you that I despise them and the talk in the office today is that everyone is of the same opinion.
Sorry, I didn't mean to fly off the handle like that. I am reaching for the Sanka.
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!´´
--Patrick Henry
I don't see the newsworthines
February 26, 2007 - 12:27 ET by BruzillaI don't see the newsworthiness of any of this. When we were flying countless DIRSUP missions of Lebabnon in the 1980s, there were plenty of us who complained about why we were there, what we were doing, why we were doing things the way we were, etc. The guys in Viet Nam felt the same way, and the WWII Willie and Joe cartoons were all drawn on real experiences that Bill Maudlin had with GIs who felt the same way about how WWII was fought as these folks feel about Iraq. The strategy is wrong, the officers are stupid or don't care, there's not enough equipment, too much rear echelon whining... it's been the same in every battle.
The only thing I see that's new is the use of this type of griping for political purposes.
Well, bruzilla, answered your own question there, huh?
February 26, 2007 - 12:33 ET by acaiguanaWell, bruzilla, answered your own question there, huh?
The anger that a lot of us feel toward both the MSM and the Democrat Party along with all of its left wing kook members is that political gain is their only concern with the war in Iraq.
That alone ought to be cause for concern and their exploitation of these 1,300 or so dummies that are participating in this folly.
And that makes it newsworthy to the MSM.
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)
What I find most disturbing a
February 26, 2007 - 13:08 ET by QueenMumWhat I find most disturbing about this 60 Minutes report is that it's reminiscent of alQaeda propoganda videos of hostages. Of course, the circumstances of those being shown are completely different. But isn't the message the same? I can't believe we're witnessing a major U.S. network using the tactics of the enemy in order to demoralize the troops and our country.
I don't know if this has been
February 27, 2007 - 13:34 ET by usinkoreaI don't know if this has been mentioned at this site or not. I didn't have time to search, but if it has not, it sounds perfect for this site to dig into.
I came to it via a good military blogger in the Korea-blogsphere - as we call it - a small group of primarily expat's with experience in (South) Korea (military or otherwise).
http://rokdrop.com/2007/02/27/exposing-the-gi-fifth-column/