December 06, 2006

Accuracy, Shmaccuracy, It's the Truthiness That Counts

When the "six burning Sunnis" story hit the blogosphere, James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal wrote that bloggers had "turned over a rock" at the Associated Press.

In his Best of the Web column today, Taranto turns over a rock himself and discovers Will Bunch, a reporter for the Philadelphia Daily News, trying to scurry away from the light. Bunch is upset that conservative bloggers and CENTCOM blew the whistle on the AP's bogus story. Apparently, Bunch is a big fan of "fake but accurate."

This is from Bunch's Daily News blog, "Attytood":

Now comes the flap over a mosque attack in Baghdad, and a dispute over the news account -- trumpted [sic] on this Daily News front page at top -- that six Sunni worshippers were burned alive. This Huffington Post post does a good job of breaking down the mixed signals on whether this event really happened as reported by the AP. It's clear to me that a) The AP based its article on information from a trusted and previously reliable source, which is no guarantee of avoiding an error but is also the proven and accepted way all over the world that journalists gather news and b) even if the report were wrong, and I'm not convinced that it is, it was in the context of horrific -- and demonstrably true -- escalating violence in Baghdad.
So, journalism is like horseshoes and hand grenades; close but dead wrong is fine as long as you follow "proven and accepted" techniques and meet your truthiness quota.

Bunch continues:

In fact, it's almost not worth swatting at these gnats from the 101st Fighting Keyboard Commandos. I'd rather just concede, and let them have as their main talking points on the Middle East: The fact that smoke was added to a picture of a real Israeli bombing of Lebanon, that the AP printed an incorrect story about one of the hundreds of deadly acts of sectarian violence in Iraq, and even the allegation -- totally unproven and not resulting in any actual charges -- that one Iraqi photographer who has worked with the AP has ties to the insurgents.
Fine. So far, Curt at Flopping Aces has counted 61 stories quoting the mysterious "police captain Jamil Hussein," the source for the six burning Sunnis story, who is unknown to the Iraqi government and seems to have dropped off the face of the Earth. And Will, if the only problem with Adnan Hajj's photos was a little smoke added to one, why did Reuters pull all ten years of his work? And why did bloggers subsequently discover multiple examples of fake and staged photographs? The "one Iraqi photographer?" That would be Bilal Hussein, who was captured in an al Qaeda bombmaking factory with an al Qaeda leader (a terrorist, not an "insurgent"), and tested positive for explosives.

This dufus Will Bunch is a reporter??!! This is too easy.

Hat tip: Larwyn.

Background: The saga of the six burning Sunnis begins.

Posted by: Bluto at 11:33 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 504 words, total size 3 kb.

1 If the AP is so great that they are the only one to find a person that everyone else claims does not exist, maybe they can go off and find some other exclusinves:
 - Like Hoffa's body
 - Like what exactly is Iran doing with nukes
 - Who 'nuked' the Russian in London
 - Who is assasinating people in Lebanon.
 - Who is behind the killing in Darfur
 - What is going on inside North Korean concentration camps
 - Find bin laden
 
Maybe they can try those bits for starters.

Posted by: Fred Fry at December 07, 2006 07:36 AM (JXdhy)

2

Aside from ones own opinion on the war, the real issue is the bias in media and Will Bunch in his own article said it clearly that it is ok to throw out fair and reasonable journalism just to make their own version of the truth stick. I can only hope that their are some up and coming reasonable journalism professors that will take this whole media news mess this last couple of years and learn from it and pass it on to the next crop of journalism students.


Posted by: DAT at December 07, 2006 07:46 AM (VxXTk)

3 I curious how Will came to the conclusion that imaginary Captain Jamil Hussein is a trusted and previously reliable source. Did he investigate the 61 other stories that quote Captain Vapor? Were those stories verified from other sources? Did other media outlets cover the same stories with different sources? Or did other media outlets pick up the same story from AP, from the same stringer?

Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at December 07, 2006 08:52 AM (oC8nQ)

4 No longer "fake but accurate", but now "truthiness" is the MSM standard.  LOL.  Liberals don't have to tell the truth because they're the "good guys" and goddess forgives them.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at December 07, 2006 09:12 AM (8e/V4)

5

The last paragraph in this post is probably the most succinct indictment of the mainstream press's malleability at the hands of the AQ/Islamist propaganda machine.  Fuckin-A right!


Posted by: shank at December 07, 2006 09:51 AM (+H1yK)

6 It's a good thing Bunch doesn't let the truth get in the way of good reporting.

Posted by: The Gentle Cricket at December 07, 2006 10:22 AM (MGakm)

7 DAT:


Bunch and his pals learned their deceitful trade in journalism school. Their professors are even worse than they are.

Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at December 07, 2006 11:46 PM (bLPT+)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
34kb generated in CPU 0.0297, elapsed 0.1259 seconds.
34 queries taking 0.1083 seconds, 162 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.