Wednesday, March 28, 2007

The Associated Press attacks bloggers for telling people what’s going on

Maybe if old media like the AP did their job better we wouldn’t need to rely more and more on blogs. Check out the irony of this "article" by Ben Feller of the AP:

Bush Cites Upbeat Bloggers From Baghdad

Mar 28 04:31 PM US/EasternBy BEN FELLERAssociated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - To back up his point that pulling out of Iraq would be a disaster,
President Bush has quoted opinions from the secretary of defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the top U.S. general in Iraq—and now, two bloggers from Baghdad.

Bush made a surprising reference to the blogosphere during a spirited defense of his war strategy on Wednesday. The mention seemed even more unusual because the president didn't identify whom he was quoting, so he seemed to be leaning on anonymous commentary.

"They have bloggers in Baghdad, just like we've got here," Bush told the National Cattlemen's Beef Association.

Then he began to quote: "Displaced families are returning home, marketplaces are seeing more activity, stores that were long shuttered are now reopening. We feel safer about moving in the city now. Our people want to see this effort succeed."

His point was that Iraqi people are seeing signs of progress—and what better example of their unbridled expression than blogs.

It turns out, the White House made clear hours later, that he was quoting two brothers, Mohammed and Omar Fadhil. They write an English- language blog from Baghdad called IraqTheModel.com. Both of them got to meet Bush in the Oval Office in 2004.

In his speech, Bush was pulling select lines from an op-ed that the brothers wrote. It appeared in The Wall Street Journal on March 5.

Blogs are Web sites that tend to be narrow in focus and directed at a niche audience. Most operate without editors and give instant reaction to the news. Their freewheeling, open nature makes them popular but also ripe for unverified statements.

###


HOLD ON!Narrow in focus”? “Ripe for unverified statements”? Excuse me, Mr. Feller but wasn’t it CBS News during the 2004 election that aired unverified information regarding President Bush’s National Guard service? Isn’t the New York Times being “freewheeling” when it publishes classified information and cites unnamed sources?

Unbelievable. Is Ben Feller saying that the American people are too stupid to understand unfiltered information? That only the holy priests – I mean “editors” in the media can help us understand what’s going on in the world?

By the way, isn’t this supposed to be a news article that Mr. Feller wrote? It reads like an opinion piece but as with many “reporters” these days, they can’t tell the difference between the two.

No comments: