The last paragraph of their Wednesday editorial (my bold) makes the point that the wire service, its defenders, and those who want to see the whole to-do as being about "just one incident," won't see, or won't admit to seeing:
What is clear about all this is that nothing is clear. Maybe there's a Jamil Hussein with the Iraqi police, but he's a sergeant, not a captain. Maybe there's a police captain whose first name is spelled Jamail, not Jamil. Both possibilities have been floated in the blogosphere, but neither has withstood scrutiny.
Editor & Publisher summed it up best when it reported that Jamil Hussein had been lost, then "found," then lost again. Amazing.
Last summer, Reuters, the media outlet that refuses to label terrorists as terrorists, was jolted by the "fauxtography" scandal. Adnan Hajj, a freelance Lebanese photographer, allegedly doctored images of the Israel-Hezbollah war and photographed what appeared to many to be staged scenes of victim rescue and recovery efforts in Qana, a Lebanese village where Israel attacked Hezbollah terrorists. Both were clearly an effort to further inflame a world that had already cast Israel as the villain.
Just as we asked in August if Reuters was "a patsy or collaborator," we wonder the same about the AP. We also wonder if we can trust any AP report from the Middle East. If it can't show us Capt. Jamil Hussein, we're not sure it has anything else we want to see.
This goes to the credibility, and ultimately the business viability, of the entire AP operation.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com, along with previous entries.
—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I think this proves there's
December 29, 2006 - 06:49 ET by sarcasmoI think this proves there's a vacuum -- similar to the one which created Fox News -- in the giant press conglomerate business. It's fine to gripe about obvious bias as we do, but I hope someone out there sees this vacuum as a profitable business opportunity...
JMR
PS Is it just me, or is this site increasingly messed-up & lame since they put the ads on the right side, starting with the disappearance of "Recent Comments" and now continuing with the vanishing of the Masthead itself? I'm not telling NB anything like "don't run ads," but I AM saying "get your $#!T together before you try running ads, and if they break something undo the ad rather than the feature." At this point an ad-sponsor for "Recent Comments" coming back would be both appreciated & profitable compared taking away useful features... Please think about it.
I just hate the site navigation now.
December 29, 2006 - 07:12 ET by acaiguanaI just hate the site navigation now.
I could of course stop posting...
ACA
Naw, stop the celebration, come on guys just stop.
:-)
...
Acaiguana says: "Ya can't win if ya don't play."
ACA,ROTFLMAO!!! ;^DIJ
December 29, 2006 - 07:44 ET by Indiana JoeACA,
ROTFLMAO!!! ;^D
IJ
Thumbs up on all counts with
December 29, 2006 - 10:19 ET by The Real TonyThumbs up on all counts with me, sarc!
Happy New Year, everyone!
Fight Terrorism at home - defeat a liberal!
If, after all this time, the
December 29, 2006 - 06:50 ET by Indiana JoeIf, after all this time, the AP still can't produce this "eyewitness," anything they come up with at this late date will be suspect. Their credibility is already pretty much shot, to those with open eyes.
IJ
PS- gotta agree with sarcasmo on this one guys. The missing right-side is sorely missed.
There is nothing new under th
December 29, 2006 - 11:19 ET by RackieThere is nothing new under the sun. According to Civil War historian Gary Gallegher, Civil War photographers frequently staged photos for effect. I believe he suggested that it was more for composition, artistic value and emotional impact rather than trying to undermine the Lincoln administration and turn the civilians against the war.
Are people employed by the AP
December 29, 2006 - 11:06 ET by mattmAre people employed by the AP or are they free-lance members, or what? It seems to me that it wouldn't be too difficult to create a network of reliable reporters all over the world that would easily out-do the A.P.
ap
December 29, 2006 - 12:30 ET by Tom BlumerThen they would have to find people willing to pay for their content. That's where AP has 'em locked nearly up.
That network/wire service would have to either become something newspapers would be willing to pay for over and above what they already pay AP, or they'd have to convince the papers to kick out AP. With the news business struggling, the last thing they're looking for is an additional expense to take on. They'd have to be convinced AP is worthless before doing that. Given that a lot of AP's people either double as local-paper reporters or are alums of local papers (and vice-versa), that would be very difficult.
That's even before getting into the "all over the world" part, and the diffculty of finding enough non-agendized journalists. Finding a few dozen for Fox News is one thing; finding hundreds/thousands worldwide is quite another.
The investment to pull off an alternative worldwide news service would be staggering; it would probably be a multiple of what Murdoch was willing to lose in the first few years of Fox News. The best hope is that Murdoch might be willing to leverage what he has and go all the way with it, which assumes BTW that he is really out for "fair and balanced" and wasn't just a business opportunist when he started Fox News (I'm afraid it was really the latter).
Some of us can remember when UPI was viable. In hindsight, it was a damper on the worst of AP's excesses. Since UPI turned into a bit player at best, AP has slowly but surely gone off the rails.