April 04, 2007
Don't Report Positive News Under Any Circumstances
We at GM's Corner have intercepted a copy of an internal memo from the head of ABC News to a reporter in Baghdad for daring to report positive news.:
To: Terry McCarthyA tip O' The GM DerbyFrom: David Westin, President of ABC News
Subject: Pink Slip
Dear Mr. McCarthy:
On Tuesday, April 3, 2007 you reported from Baghdad that the so-called surge is working and that in some neighborhoods things are getting better. The video showed people shopping, shops doing business, people eating ice cream, children in a playground and traffic flowing smoothly. True, you did show also on the video the results of a car bomb, but you have wildly exceeded your authority by showing positive news from that war-torn, full of sectarian violence, devastated by civil war city. This cannot be tolerated by a member of the media. We have standards of objective (our term) reporting to uphold. Any objective reporter in fact would be well advised to hew to the party line (but not the Democratic Party to be sure) and show how the invasion and occupation of a sovereign country have had such a bad effect. The world of course strongly supports our efforts, witness the condemnation from Europe. To cap it all off, you noted that it has only been seven weeks since the beginning of the surge and that only half of the troop enhancement has occurred. If this is allowed to stand Mr. McCarthy, people may get the idea that Chimpy McBush has done a good thing.
As you are well aware, we at ABC news are determined to show the war in Iraq in the least favorable light and blame everything on President Bush. Your video report has seriously damaged our "Main Stream Media Credentials" by showing anything that Chimpy McBush may have done in a positive light. Be advised sir, that you have been fired, and I will also be speaking with our resident talking head of an anchorman for daring to introduce you with a "smirky" positive note.
Sincerely
David Westin
President, ABC News
to Glenn Reynolds
Posted by GM Roper at April 4, 2007 08:05 AM
| TrackBack
I caught this ABC report earlier and thought that it was essentially a 'fair' report on a difficult situation.
But it does lead me to ask myself a hard question. As much as I HATE the Media (and as you know I do), I wonder if things would have been presented 'better' had not Bush done such an inept job in detailing what was actually happening in Iraq. I know it's simplistic, but now that Petraeus in in charge there, things 'seem' to be at the least 'stabled out'. Before he went---- not so much.
I understand that the Pentagon had a budget of $419 BILLION in 2006. For that amount of money should not the effort in Iraq have been, well not to equivocate here, BETTER. Perhaps if George had thrown some heavy objects at some Pentagon targets a LONG TIME AGO, the Media might have had 'better' stories to tell.
I confess that I am pretty clueless about most things--- but still folks I am somewhat regretfully actually looking seriously at the possibility that at least 'some' of the 'bad' Media was the direct result of a BAD PERFORMANCE. Perhaps what we thought(think) was a purely tendentious Media performance was also regrettably a somewhat accurate reflection of 'facts on the ground'. Facts that were never really explained by the people who should have been explaining them. For example why did not EVERYONE say years ago that the 'insurgency' in the Sunni areas could only be crushed when the Sunnis themselves got tired of it. The 'reason' why Petraeus has a chance at success is that the Sunnis are seemingly splitting apart on the issue of 'resistance'. Perhaps nothing could have been done UNTIL that 'tipping point' had been reached. Perhaps Petraeus would have failed abysmally had he attempted this years ago , and it is as much the 'tenor' of the times as the 'tactics' employed which dictate likely results. If this is true than someone should have said that --- Loud and Clear. I have the unpleasant feeling that the Media with their incompetent ,non-contextual, sensationalism, stepped into and filled a void that was the direct result of a poor Pentagon Effort.
I still think the Media sucks but for $419 BILLION I expect a 'better' effort by the Defense Bureaucracy. For $419 BILLION I expect a slam-dunk as someone famously once said. If the rest of the organisation(especially its information distribution and analysis end) were as good as the 'pointy-end' of it, that money would be well spend. As it is now ---- not so much.
Posted by dougf at April 4, 2007 02:31 PM
Good grief?..report positive news?..Heaven forfend!..heh
Posted by Angel at April 4, 2007 11:08 PM
As much as I hate to think it, I cannot get the idea out of my mind that this "story/Posting" is just another fraudulent tale. It just fits too well with the other "maybe so" stories that you include in this blog.
You guys are having to reach pretty far to keep topping your other "facts".
Posted by James S Melbert at April 5, 2007 04:37 PM
James, you have absolutely no sense of humor do you? I can remember sitting in your home when I was a kid having the time of my life, where did that sense of humor you had then go? The post above is obviously satire, fun, humor, made up... look at the wording Jim, would any news professional write to a subordinate that way? Of course not, thus, it has to be satire based on the fact, FACT mind you that the MSM seldom and with malice aforethought has not presented a positive news side to the reconstruction/security effort in Iraq. Woody is right, Democrats have NO SENSE OF HUMOR!!!
Posted by GM at April 6, 2007 04:23 AM
