The Washington Post’s Ombudsman Michael Getler criticizes his paper not only for they didn’t do when Bush began building his case for invading Iraq, but for what they are doing now. Which is to make the same mistake.
However one feels, it seems legitimate to ask: Is this war winnable? If so, how and at what cost? If no, should there be consequences or penalties for launching it? Is it making us safer? Or is it producing more terrorists and hatred of the United States and turning Iraq into a breeding ground for both? Has it diminished our ability to fight the force that did attack us, al Qaeda, and find its leader, Osama bin Laden? How do we make informed judgments about these questions, and how much can the press help us?
… In recent months, some news organizations, such as the New York Times and The Post, have done some soul-searching about their prewar coverage. Where was the press when we needed it, was the question properly asked by press critics and critical readers. Yet that question may well be asked again, and with far greater force and consequence, in the months and years to come if those gut questions about the war are not substantively addressed in this election campaign.
He then gives the press an excuse that’s indicative of part of the problem.
One reason the press didn’t do well before the war is that Congress didn’t do well. With few exceptions, Congress provided virtually no challenge to administration policies and claims. When that happens the press has fewer people to quote outside the White House. Too often, the early challenges some lawmakers did pose were missed or under-reported by The Post.
With Kerry’s difficulty explaining his vote on the war, some may think he was swept in a tidal wave of patriotism, or cowardice. But some Congressman did provide another view. The Senate vote for the Iraq resolution was 77-23. In the House it was 296-133. But apparently almost a quarter of the Senate and 30% of the House does not meet the threshold for providing a “challenge to the administration policies.” The same was true of the 100,000 or more demonstrators that descended upon Washington and the millions throughout the world. But unless the opposition emanates from a majority of party leaders, it’s discounted.
…Kerry, who might be expected to carry on this debate, has thus far presented such a conflicted and contorted view of the war that there has still been no one to quote whose views are likely to make the front page very often. The arguments still are being framed and expressed with more clarity inside a torrent of books, magazine articles and op-ed columns. When Kerry did speak out on Thursday, citing a newly disclosed and pessimistic intelligence report, The Post — wrongly and unfairly, I thought — buried the story on Page A20.
The daily news reporting from Iraq remains solid. But will the big news organizations somehow be able to capture and present to citizens the larger questions that this war raises?
Another example of why I’m not optimistic occurred last Monday. The outgoing commander of Marine Corps forces in western Iraq told reporters from The Post, the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times and CNN that he opposed the assault on militants in the volatile city of Fallujah in April and also disagreed with the subsequent order to halt the attack once underway. “When you order elements of a Marine division to attack a city, you really need to understand what the consequences of that are going to be and not perhaps vacillate in the middle of something like that,” said Lt. Gen. James T. Conway.
Several Iraqi cities are controlled or dominated by insurgents, and the battle over Fallujah symbolizes the dilemma faced by U.S. forces, who could undoubtedly overrun the resistance, or at least displace it, in these cities. But they would also surely pay a big price in Iraq and the Arab world. It will be a long time, if ever, before Iraqis will be able to undertake such missions. The Globe put the story on Page One. The Los Angeles Times referred to it on Page One. The Post put it on Page A17 with a one-column headline.
As Getler points out, placement may not be everything, but it’s important, extremely important. The Post often makes the same mistake about the placement of Middle East stories. Israelis die: front page. Palestinians die: Look for a World Brief item on A24.
The Post has done a good job occasionally, even putting a fact check piece on the front page. But it seems the other side of spin has a hard time getting much attention in even the best newspapers. What a shame.