In Re Newsweek: Which Side Are You On?

In Re Newsweek: Which Side Are You On?

In Re Newsweek: Which Side Are You On?

In its campaign against Newsweek, the Bush Administration seeks to undermine already faltering public confidence.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

In what is clearly a coordinated campaign of deliberate defamation, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, White House spokesman Scott McClellan (citing George W. Bush), State Department spokesperson Richard Boucher and Pentagon spokespeople Lawrence DiRita and Bryan Whitman have all sought to blame Newsweek magazine for the deaths of Afghan citizens killed in weeks of anti-American rioting. The charge is intellectually insupportable and morally indefensible. Muslims, worldwide, did not require any new information to heed the jihadists’ call to demonstrate against America. Newsweek‘s mistaken report of official confirmation of a Koran having been flushed down a toilet inside what Amnesty International has termed “the American gulag” in Guantánamo follows years of confirmed reports of officially sanctioned torture, both physical and psychological, some of it specifically designed to offend Muslim sensibilities. A Pew Research Center poll taken in early 2004 found that large majorities in four Muslim countries held deeply negative views of the United States. In Jordan, one of our closest Arab allies, our approval rating hovered at a mere 5 percent.

As those in a position to know have pointed out, the connection between the riots and the tiny item in the American newsweekly is tenuous at best. Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that the senior commander in Afghanistan believed the protests stemmed from that country’s reconciliation process. “He thought it was not at all tied to the article in the magazine,” Myers explained. Afghan President Hamid Karzai confirmed this view. “Those demonstrations were in reality not related to the Newsweek story,” he said. “They were more against the elections in Afghanistan…. They were more against the strategic partnership with the United States.” A cartoon in the conservative Moonie-owned Washington Times depicting Pakistan as America’s puppy was also exploited in these same demonstrations. What’s more, the FBI has documented detainee complaints at Guantánamo of Koran mistreatment, including an allegation that guards had “flushed a Koran in the toilet.” The Pentagon confirmed five such incidents, though not the toilet-flushing one. (In Afghanistan, a Pentagon employee did report that an interrogator “took a Koran, threw it on the floor and stepped on it.”) This all must be viewed against a backdrop of an Administration that repeatedly manipulated intelligence data to mislead the nation into war–next to which Newsweek‘s mistake, while not insignificant, pales.

The Administration’s anti-Newsweek campaign is part of its relentless war on the press–and more generally on democratic accountability–in this instance eagerly abetted by its allies in the right-wing media and even some members of the SCLM (so-called liberal media). In a case where the age-old (and much overused) slogan “Which Side Are You On?” really does apply, we should hardly be surprised to find Rush Limbaugh playing for the other team. He explained–apparently on the basis of mass mental telepathy–that Newsweek “wanted the story to be true” because the media “have an adversarial relationship with America” and “end up siding with the bad guys.” His ideological bunkmate, Bill O’Reilly, added the calumny that Newsweek “magnif[ies] every mistake the military makes in order to hammer the Bush administration.” The Wall Street Journal editorial page professed to detect “a basic media mistrust of the military that goes back to Vietnam.”

Over at National Review, writers and editors participated in an orgy of media-bashing, all of it guided by Administration-sanctioned attack lines. Jonah Goldberg complained of “the media’s unreflective willingness to undermine the war on terror.” Dennis Prager charged Newsweek with being “directly responsible for the deaths of innocents and for damaging America,” driven by its loyalties “to profits and to its political-social agenda,” which “oppose[s] the war in Iraq and loathe[s] the Bush administration.” Editor in chief Rich Lowry also blamed “a media culture, set during Vietnam,” obsessed with “exposing wrongdoing and failures of the U.S. military.”

Coincidentally, these attacks were also leveled at anyone who questioned the Administration’s pre-war assertions touting its certainty not only of an Iraqi WMD program but also of its readiness to manufacture nuclear weapons and share them with its close ally Al Qaeda.

More disturbing was the willingness of so many in the non-right-wing media to embrace the Administration’s Newsweek-as-murderer narrative. Martin Peretz, part owner and editor of the not-so-liberal New Republic, termed Newsweek‘s editors “simply scavengers” whose arrogance “caused 17 people [to lose] their lives.” Washington Post media cop Howard Kurtz bemoaned what he called the “explosive consequences of [Newsweek‘s] reporting.” (Irony of ironies–in writing about Newsweek editor Mark Whitaker’s alleged journalistic crimes, including the overuse of anonymous sources, Kurtz invited an anonymous source to trash the well-liked editor as “the ultimate apparatchik.”) Not to be outdone, self-appointed blogger cop Jeff Jarvis denounced Newsweek for publishing a story that “cost people their lives, put the lives of our soldiers in the Mideast at risk, damaged the American position in the effort to defend itself and spread democracy, and damaged the already tattered reputation of journalism.”

The Bush Administration, in its campaign to eliminate democratic accountability, has consistently sought to undermine already faltering public confidence in the media, thereby further weakening the press’s ability to fulfill its essential role in our delicate system of checks and balances. The jihad against Newsweek, like that against Dan Rather and others, seizes upon honest media mistakes to discredit the very idea of neutral, reality-based reporting. The longer the mainstream media fail to awaken to this unhappy reality, the greater will be our collective impotence when they finally realize it’s time to fight back. For that reason–and despite its error–Newsweek‘s fight is our fight too.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x