Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

The Anchoress

Home
Catholic
Network Journo and Anchoress talk Newsweek

Network Journo and Anchoress talk Newsweek

Last updated on: March 13, 2015 at 8:47 pm by Elizabeth Scalia

Network Journo and Anchoress talk Newsweek 2015-03-13T20:47:24+00:00 Elizabeth Scalia

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I have a friend, a very good friend, who is a well-respected member of a network news team. He’s got the awards and accolades. More importantly, he has the high regard of all who know him. I have known him for years and can personally attest to the fact that while he is a bit left-of-center in some cases, and can sometimes get as caught up in things as the rest of us, he is quite one of the fairest people I’ve come across in my traveled life. He was horrified by Rathergate. The excesses of the press sometimes get his gut, but at other times he staunchly defends his profession against the all-too-easy extreme characterizations we bloggers (myself included, sometimes) make of journalists in general and mainstream powernewsbrokers in particular.

He and I were talking Newsweek today, naturally, shooting emails back and forth, and I am always happy to do this with him, because sometimes, in the shout and fury of a blogswarm regatta, one can see things begin to list a bit off kilter, but the need to “ride the blogwind” trumps the ability to exhale and think things through a little further. My friend’s kneejerk instinct to consider all angles always helps me to get back on an even keel.

With his permission, I am reprinting some of our exchange, because I thought it might be helpful for the blogosphere to know how this is all playing with successful and influential members of the profession, and because I think both of us make some sane points that might keep the story from blowing off course.

WARNING: Some salty language. Do not read if you can’t handle it. He IS a newsman, after all! :-)

Network Guy: The whole Newsweek thing is making me ill. All I could think when I read it this morning was “Thank God, at least when WE f*cked up, people didn’t die. There but for the grace of God…” But I don’t have much patience for some bloggers who argue that Newsweek, or the “MSM” are blatantly anti-American and conspiring to do us in. What piffle. They f*cked up. It’s that simple. I find it shocking that Newsweek hasn’t– in addition to confessing its sins — retracted the story. But then, as we know, it’s out of character for the media to admit a mistake, especially something that sparked something this heinous and, in fact, frightening. Maybe they are worried for their own safety, and are expecting people with
torches and pitchforks to come stalking down Broadway….

Anchoress: I have to admit, I am not comfortable with some of the more extreme, “let’s destroy Newsweek” talk I am reading on the ‘net. I believe that in the end Newsweek adn the rest will do themselves in quite nicely without our help. But I do think this very odd new standard of journalism, ie, “well, it might not be true, after all, but it MIGHT still be true,” is a very low sort of standard, and not a good place for journalism to descend to.

It is interesting to me that you note the media will not admit a mistake. I have heard some apologists on the radio saying how “upright” Newsweek has been in admitting its error (9 days later), but really, they’ve admitted nothing – any admission of error is obliterated by the sly “but we don’t really think we err’ed” tone. It seems to me that it is the Isikoffs and the Thomases who are routinely castigating the WH for “not admitting mistakes” and apologizing. Yet their own ability to admit to a mistake and apologize has shown itself to be rather half-assed.

NG: …Whitaker, the editor, his reaction to the whole imbroglio was — how shall I put this? — cool to the touch. He said that they couldn’t verify that anything like that had happened, or hadn’t, yet not accepting any real responsibility for the tragedies that resulted from their reporting (or mis-reporting) the story. It was much too grudging, as if to say, “Well, it COULDA happened, ya know. I mean, maybe not the way we said, but, it COULDA.” The fact is: if Newsweek REALLY wanted to make a big f*cking deal out of this, and exploit it, they would have done a complete story on it, and not buried it in the Periscope section, which is comprised of a lot of gossip and inside-the-beltway hearsay to begin with. They exercised bad judgment in going with a juicy tidbit that couldn’t be independently verified — and I honestly believe they were profoundly ignorant of the impact the story would have. (For that matter, so, perhaps, was the WH … which didn’t raise any objections about the report until several days after it was published and the rioting broke out.)

A: You know what I think? I think we’ve been hearing these unsubstantiated charges made by Al Q prisoners for three years now, and it’s kind of like the “Bush/TANG/AWOL” story, just something that gets picked at and never proved, and the American public AND the WH finally just roll their eyes about it, because it’s been such a steady drumbeat of accusations.

And I even think Newsweek didn’t think clearly about it, for this reason: They didn’t see a story in a Bible being used as toilet paper. They didn’t see a story in a crucifix being covered in urine. They didn’t see a story
in an icon of Mary surrounded by cut outs of genitalia. They simply wouldn’t SEE the story thru the eyes of the Muslims. They have completely cut themselves out of the mindset of faith, to the point that they simply cannot imagine that what is meaningless to them has meaning for others, and they cannot anticipate responses, for that reason. Unless, they are anticipateing stereotypical responses of red-state “salivating morons.”

NG: You may be right. They have little sensitivity when it comes to matters of religion, and no idea how deeply disturbing that kind of desecration is to people of faith, any faith.

A: Hmmm…kinda like Tina Brown having no idea who incredibly insulting her post-conclave piece on Benedict XVI was to the Catholics? Forget it, don’t even bother answering that! :-) What would you say to someone who posits a theory that – for example – Newsweek DID in fact understand that it had a drop of poison in its vile but – knowing it was not well-sourced, they chose to drop it into the Periscopes section to see what would happen, if in fact, they could hit a mark, without anticipating all the rest of it to happen. Is that possible? Is that something a journalist would do – slip something out there, in a seemingly innocuous fashion, and wait to see if it hits a target?

NG: Nah, not in my experience. I seriously doubt it.

It’s more likely that a SOURCE with an agenda found a gullible accomplice in Newsweek. That the SOURCE wanted to unleash that poison and see what would happen. Who knows? I might have been someone at DOD who doesn’t like the way things are going. Or it might have been someone trying to intentionally put another stake through the heart of the media. But it’s entirely possible, whoever is behind it, didn’t realize they were opening a Pandora’s box. As someone said this morning on one of the chat shows (mixing my fantastic allegories) “There is real concern in Washington that the Islamic world will not believe Washington’s apology and explanation — and they won’t be able to get the genie back in the bottle.”

A: Wait, do you mean “Washington’s” apology or “Newsweek’s”?

NG: Yeah. Thanks for clarifying that. I think it was Russert. He was saying that he was hearing that folks in the ME thought the Newsweek “apology” was orchestrated by the WH, and they weren’t buying it.

A: don’t know if I agree with your theory that the press is more distrustful because of the WMD intel problem. They seemed pretty darned distrustful from the get-go, to me. Wasn’t it Newsweek, if I remember, who – the week after 9/11 ran the cover story with : WHY DO THEY HATE US, which more or less assumed that we’d done something to deserve the attack?

NG: Maybe. But I’m reminded of something a journalism prof told me in college: “If your mother says she loves you, check it out.”

In other words: don’t believe it just because someone says it is so.

(Of course, perhaps the Newsweek crowd should have paid more attention to that when someone started spewing the scoop on the Koran…)

A: Now, I’d like your opinion. It’s not my question, but it’s a good one, by Roger Kimball: Why is it that all the stories you read in Time-Newsweek-The New York Times-The Washington Post-Etc. or see on CNN-The BBC-CBS-NBC-Etc., why is it that all their stories about Iraq, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, Donald Rumsfeld, George W. Bush, etc., why is it that the presumption, the prejudice, the predisposition never goes the other way? Why is it that their reporters always assume the worst: that we’re doing dirty at Guantanamo Bay, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc., and are primed to pick up and believe any rumor damaging to the United States? Shakespeare knew that rumor was a “pipe/blown by surmises, jealousies, conjectures,” not to be trusted. So why do these journalists, trained to sift evidence, to probe sources, to listen beyond the static of rumor: why do they only do so in one direction, so to speak? Yes, I know that’s a self-answering question, at least in part, but it is worth pondering nonetheless. Austin Bay calls the incident at Newsweek “The Press’ Abu Ghraib.”

What do you think of that question, and do you think this is, in fact, the press’ Abu Ghraib?

NG: I think the media’s instinct is to mistrust the Official Story — to suspect ulterior motives and discern an alternative reality that may not be as rosy as the authorities tell us. It has nothing to do with being anti-American, but has everything to do with being anti-manipulation. This White House — and others — have proven to be masters at using the media to their own advantage, which is something the media doesn’t particularly like, no matter what one’s political leanings might be.

If the government tells you it’s running a thoroughbred in the Kentucky Derby, and you notice that this horse’s ears are unusually large, there is a natural inclination to wonder if it is, in fact, a mule. You can’t help but start checking its teeth. I think the whole WMD thing got the press looking a lot more closely at ears, and teeth, and various other anatomical anomolies…

A: Hmmmm…I’m highly dissatisfied. You didn’t actually answer if this was the press’ Abu Ghraib, but I’ll let you off the hook because I likes ya.

I have to admit, I’m mad, and I’m really tired of the press I grew up admiring repeatedly letting us down like this – by us, I mean we consumers of news. That said, I also am a little leery of calling Newsweek “Anti-American,” for several reasons. First, I believe if they’re anti-anything, they are Anti-Bush, and any damage they might have wanted to inflict would have been damage in that direction, and not to innocent people, our troops, or even our foreign policy. Remember, they want a Democrat president in the WH in three years, and that president is not going to want to have to deal with this crap. Afghanistan should be “no” story by ’08 except a successful one that helps America in the long run and doesn’t bring more problems to a new president’s plate. I do not think Newsweek anticipated all this.

NG: I don’t know how much of what we’re witnessing is because of hubris, how much is competitive pressure, how much is ignorance, how much is arrogance… or how much is a combination of all of the above. But I don’t think it has much, if anything, to do with anti-American bias in the press. America has been very good to the press — too good, perhaps? — and there is nothing to gain from shitting where you eat, so to speak.

A: So…bottom line…no, the genie can’t be put back in the bottle, the poison can’t be uninjected, and we’ll have to work very hard to regain the trust of these people who were beginning to trust us, to stabalize their government, etc, etc, all because a big-time, modern day newsman ran with a story that needed more checking, and relied upon the new “prove me wrong – but you really can’t” standard of journalism to get him by. Egad. We’re in trouble.

NG: Yep. Pathetic.

Anchoress note: Maybe more than merely pathetic. Here’s the latest:

Muslims in Afghanistan were skeptical about the turnaround on Monday.

“We will not be deceived by this,” Islamic cleric Mullah Sadullah Abu Aman told Reuters. “It comes because of American pressure.” Aman was the leader of a group of clerics who vowed to call for a holy war against the United States.”

I cannot help but be angry, very angry, still.

WELCOME: Captain’s Corner readers, please look around. The Newsweek fiasco has dominated the blog today, but I think I came to understand why so many American journalists count themselves as Journalists first and Americans second, here. We’re also talking about how the rest of Europe seems to hate France, we are looking into new PC language reforms and we have a little fun at Newsweek’s expense.

The Fourth Estate

Previous Post

May 16, 2005

Some fun at Newsweek's expense. Take a breather.

Next Post

May 16, 2005 Newsweek RETRACTS but the damage is done

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category "Remaking" Ourselves 'Remaking' America 9/10 Mindset 9/11 trials Abortion ACORN Adoration Advent Advent 2008 Advent 2009 Advent 2010 Alternative Energy Alternative Media America American Catholic Church American Church American Genius Ameridolatry ANCHORESS BOOKSHELF Anglican-Roman Reconciliation Answers & Questions Anti_Semitism Archbishop Hilarion Ayn Rand Bad Mass Barack Obama Baseball Benedict Benedict & Islam Benedict in UK Benedict XVI Benedictine Bill Whittle Birth Control Blogs and Blogging Blogs and Blogging Bloodless Coup Bobby Jindal Bookchat Breitbart Bride at every wedding... Bride at every wedding... Buckley Bullies Bush Bad? Bush Good Buster Capitalism Catholic Fiction Catholic Vocations Catholicism Celibacy Chaput Charitable Stuff Chesterton Chile Chris Christie Christians in Exile Christine O' Donnell Christmas Christmas Gift Ideas Church Hates Science? Church hates women Communion of Saints Compline Conclave 2013 Confession Constitutional Stuff Conversion Crisis & Opportunity Critical Thinking Crooks and Liars Crucible of Faith Cuba Culture of Life Culture of Life/Death Culture of Treason? Dancing Death Dialogue re Islam Dick Meyer Divorce and Remarriage DOJ Domestic Terrorism Dominican Order Don't try me too high Dowd Dumb Democrat moves Dumb GOP moves Economic woe Education Egregious Harry Reid Elder Son Elder Son's Sweet Girlfriend Elderly Election '10 Election '12 Election '16 Election 2004 Election 2006 Election 2008 Election 2010 Election 2016 Elena Kagan Elitism Embryonic Stem Cell Research End Times? English language Enhanced Interrogation Erosion of Rights Eucharist Euthanasia Exorcism Extraordinary Synod Facebook Faith Faith and Reason Faith Friday Faith Perspective Faithful Friday Fascism Again Fascism in America Fatima FCC Feminism Film First Things Forgiveness Fr. James Martin Francis and Islam Francis in America Frassati Fred Thompson Free Speech? Freedom of Worship FutureChurch Global Pandemic GOP Congress Haiti Head Covering Health Care Here and Queer Hermits Heroes Hitchens Holy Spirit Holy Week '09 Holy Week '10 Hoo-Hah & BS Hoo-Hah & BS Icons Illegal Immigration In The Arena Interviews Interwebz Iran Uprising Iraqi Christians ISIL ISIS Islamic State Islamification/Islamofascism Islamification/Islamofascism Isra-El It's all about me! Me! ME! James Burke Jerry Lewis Jesus Christ Joblessness John Boehner John McCain John Paul II John XXIII Juan Williams Just Words Katrina/Rita King is a Fink Latin Mass Leadership Lectio Divina Lent Lent '08 Lent '09 Lent 2010 Lent 2011 Limbaugh Listen to Lizzie Litigious Society Liturgy Liturgy of the Hours Mainstream Media Manliness Marriage Mary Media Excess Medical Merton Michelle Obama Mighty John O' Connor Misc. Miss Ella Missionaries Mitt Romney Monasticism My brother S My Irish Aunties Mystic Monks Nanny Statism Nature NEA Neri New Media Newman Noonan Notre Dame NPR Stuff Nun News Obama Bad? Obama Good? Obama White House Oil Spill Online Retreat '08 Online Retreat Days Oratory Orthodoxy Our Hillary! Parenting Passionists Patheos Patheos Book Club Patrons Paul Ryan Penance Penn Jillette Philosophy PJTV Podcasts Poetry Politics-free zone Pop Culture Pope Emeritus Pope Francis Prayer Predictions Priesthood Pro-Life Public Sector Unions Purgatory Questions about Catholicism Quotes of the Day Quoting the News Race in America rants Recipes Remarried Catholics Reposts by request Retreat thoughts Rome Rudy Giuliani Russia Saints Sarah Palin Scandal Scott Brown SCOTUS Scriptural stuff Secularism Send in the clowns Serving up hot links Sexuality Sherrod Shroud of Turin Sisters and Nuns Social Entrepreneurship Social Media Social Security Socialism doesn't work Sports and Faith Stem Cells Strange Gods Suffering Synod Tea Parties Tea Party Terri Schiavo The 9/11 Commission The Catholic Answer The Constitution The Desert The Fourth Estate The Pelosi The Perpetual Adolescents The Rosary Third Party? Timothy Dolan Touch of evil TSA Tsunami TV/Pop Culture/Music TV/Pop Culture/Music Twitter Uncategorized Unemployment Unintended Consequences US Military Vaginal Musings Vatican Vespers video faves Vile Joe Biden Voter Fraud War by Litigation War on Terror War, What it good for? Why can't weeee be ... World Youth Days Year of Faith Year of the Priest

Select a Month August 2016 July 2016 April 2016 March 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 August 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which continent is experiencing the fastest growth in Christianity?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Africa Europe Oceania Asia