Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"When watchdogs,... morph into lap dogs,...the nation is in trouble."

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
dajoki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 01:43 PM
Original message
"When watchdogs,... morph into lap dogs,...the nation is in trouble."
The Nation
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060327/thomas

article | posted March 9, 2006 (March 27, 2006 issue)
Lap Dogs of the Press
Helen Thomas

This article is adapted from Helen Thomas's forthcoming book, Watchdogs of Democracy? The Waning Washington Press Corps and How It Has Failed the Public. Copyright 2006 by Helen Thomas. Printed by permission of Scribner, a division of Simon & Schuster, Inc.

Of all the unhappy trends I have witnessed--conservative swings on television networks, dwindling newspaper circulation, the jailing of reporters and "spin"--nothing is more troubling to me than the obsequious press during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. They lapped up everything the Pentagon and White House could dish out--no questions asked.

Reporters and editors like to think of themselves as watchdogs for the public good. But in recent years both individual reporters and their ever-growing corporate ownership have defaulted on that role. Ted Stannard, an academic and former UPI correspondent, put it this way: "When watchdogs, bird dogs, and bull dogs morph into lap dogs, lazy dogs, or yellow dogs, the nation is in trouble."

The nave complicity of the press and the government was never more pronounced than in the prelude to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. The media became an echo chamber for White House pronouncements. One example: At President Bush's March 6, 2003, news conference, in which he made it eminently clear that the United States was going to war, one reporter pleased the "born again" Bush when she asked him if he prayed about going to war. And so it went.

<<snip>>

When Secretary of State Colin Powell delivered his ninety-minute "boffo" statement on Saddam's lethal toxic arsenal on February 5, 2003, before the United Nations, the Times said he left "little question that Mr. Hussein had tried hard to conceal" a so-called smoking gun or weapons of mass destruction. After two US special weapons inspection task forces, headed by chief weapons inspector David Kay and later by Charles Duelfer, came up empty in the scouring of Iraq for WMD, did you hear any apologies from the Bush Administration? Of course not. It simply changed its rationale for the war--several times. Nor did the media say much about the failed weapons search. Several newspapers made it a front-page story but only gave it one-day coverage. As for Powell, he simply lost his halo. The newspapers played his back-pedaling inconspicuously on the back pages.


My concern is why the nation's media were so gullible. Did they really think it was all going to be so easy, a "cakewalk," a superpower invading a Third World country? Why did the Washington press corps forgo its traditional skepticism? Why did reporters become cheerleaders for a deceptive Administration? Could it be that no one wanted to stand alone outside Washington's pack journalism?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. A fellow DUer drew a high-quality toon of this a few years ago
I wish I could remember who did it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemoTex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. SoCalDem drew it.
Edited on Sun Mar-12-06 02:04 PM by DemoTex
Give me five to get it over to the bucket and I'll post it here.

On edit: Here ya' go ..

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. That's it! -- A perfect fit for the article
The Nation should have purchased it and used it for a cover.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dajoki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. perfect!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
European Socialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
2. We have been let down and with no remorse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dajoki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-12-06 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. no remorse? more like gung-ho n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Dec 20th 2014, 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC