(Wednesday, May 18) Note to new visitors from Andrew Sullivan’s blog, various leftist blogs, and a few others:
Welcome to LBC! It seems that my “Update (11:06 a.m.)” below is causing a blogospheric ruckus. Regarding my “should not have reported it” statement, I stand firmly behind it. I have never advocated government censorship of the media; no government agency or source asked Newsweek not to run the story, so that point is moot. I was referring to the use of good judgment and discernment by reporters themselves.
They make judgments all the time, for various reasons, about what is and isn’t newsworthy. In a 700-word story, for example, they can’t include every single fact associated with every single event. They decide what’s important and true, what’s unduly inflammatory, etc., with every story they write.
I may respond to detractors in a separate post if I’m ever in the mood, but for now I’ll borrow something from another blogger. I agree wholeheartedly with his assessment not because I’m a shill for the “Religious Right,” “right-wing,” or whichever slur you prefer. I agree because I see the nonsense every day, and it’s disgusting. An example of what journalists choose not to report:
It’s not as if journalists don’t know how to be exquisitely sensitive about their reporting when they care to be: Media organs, for example, don’t normally report the race of those who perpetrate crimes, for fear that such reports might reinforce stereotypes or lead to lynching. But passing along unfounded rumors that reinforce enemy propaganda in wartime, and lead to significant diplomatic and military problems in a friendly country doesn’t, apparently, rise to the level of importance required to trigger such sensitivities. (Source)
I know how biased journalists are by the kind of information they choose to include and exclude in stories. Why don’t they include the race of criminals if they’re black? Because they believe doing so would reinforce negative stereotypes about blacks-as-criminals. If the crook is behind bars, that’s one thing. But it’s quite another if the perpetrator is still at large. The race of an armed criminal on the loose is an important detail, don’t you think?
Before you people get any more ridiculous with this “free press vs. government censorship” meme, try using something God gave us all: common sense. Some of us have more of it than others, but you get the point.
Another update: I find it perversely gratifying that so many liberals are reading and responding to this post. The tone of your e-mails isn’t the point (it’s not wise to send nasty e-mails from your work e-mail address, by the way); you’re spending precious time reading my blog and telling all your friends. In spite of yourselves, you’re doing exactly what I’d hoped. The more exposed you are to different ideas, the better. Thanks. 
——————————————————————————————
Update (11:06 a.m.): Let me clear up one thing. Whether Americans flushed the Koran down the toilet is irrelevant. Newsweek should not have reported it, even if true. It’s common sense, people. Those journalists knew how Muslims would react! Why would you hurt your own country and risk more deaths just to report this “fact?” To what end???
America-hating morons media!
Be sure to scroll way down for updates. The fallout begins!
——————————————————————————————–
7:30 p.m. — Newsweek retracts. The AP is also reporting. Now let’s see heads roll.
——————————————————————————————–
This is what happens when I go to bed early. I miss the beginning of a swarm.
Liberal Newsweek‘s anti-American bias manifested itself in an ugly way. In their zeal to report anything sinister about Americans (especially those serving/working overseas) and anything good about Arabs (the terrorist kind), they erroneously reported that American interrogators at Guantanamo Bay “desecrated” the Koran.
When was the last time you heard the words “Bible” and “desecrated” in the same sentence? I digress.
Read about it on My Way News. Because of the report, Muslims started rioting, as if they needed an excuse. But our own Newsweek sure gave them one. Knowing we’re in the middle of a war with people who’ve hated us for centuries and intent on destroying us and Western culture itself, you’d think Newsweek would’ve used common sense in reporting the story in the first place. Why write and publish a story that you know will only encourage more violence? Answer: It made America look bad, and that was good enough for “objective” liberal journalists.
They’ll get what’s coming to them. The blogosphere has erupted in a righteously indigant swarm (The conservative side, of course. Liberal bloggers are busy defending the rag.), forcing mainstream media to pick up the story. I hope they lose advertisers, readers, and heads over this.
Blogger Roger Simon wrote about the story today (Why is he blogging at the Huffington Post?), and Huffington Post “blogger” and liberal apologist James Lampley responds:
That the magazine is responsible enough to voluntarily admit an error amid the ensuing firestorm is something to be respected, not to be used as Mr. Simon did, as a jumping-off point for suggesting that general media and their reporters have a get-Bush mentality.
You can tell Lampley is not a real blogger as he waxes ridiculously about Newsweek‘s nobility “responsibility” in owning up. If he were, he’d know that in the age of the blog, the magazine had no choice but to confess. Newsweek‘s catching it right now, but maybe they’ve saved what little face they have left by coming clean early. It’s a lesson Dan Rather had to learn the hard way.
Others blogging about Newsweek‘s screw-up: Austin Bay, Power Line (Update), Michelle Malkin (with lots of links), The Anchoress (more links), Political Teen (video)…
Perversely funny, as is this from Scrappleface:
While the magazine has apologized publicly to the riot victims and their families, Mr. Whitaker told the New York Times, “We’re not retracting anything. We don’t know what the ultimate facts are.”For those unschooled in professional journalistic ethics, Mr. Whitaker explained that a retraction demands a higher standard of evidence than an ordinary news item.
“You don’t just rush to press with a retraction until you nail down the facts,” he added.
More bloggers: Dean’s World, Blogs for Bush, Jim Geraghty (Update), Jeff Jarvis (Update), Polipundit (“The Consequences Of Trying Too Hard To Make Bush [And America] Look Bad”), Updates galore, Wizbang, Michael Silence, Scott Wickham…
Here’s another liberal apologist.
A libertarian weighs in. And Samantha says:
I would not be out in the street protesting about what someone was rumored to have done with a copy of the Bible. I wouldn’t be protesting over what someone had been proven to have done with a copy of the Bible. Neither would any other Christian with a lick of sense. The power of the Bible is not contained in any one physical copy. Its power and influence rests in the words within that can be written in the hearts and minds of men.
LHM offers a different perspective:
Regardless of whether the reports were true or false, to accuse Newsweek for the deaths of people would be synonymous with blaming J. D. Salinger for the death of John Lennon….The blogosphere has been even more unforgiving with Michelle Malkin now leading the charge and having the audacity to accuse Newsweek and their editors of having blood on their hands.
Right Wing Nut House has a nice-looking blog. And great commentary.
It’s the Pentagon’s fault! More here.
From Reuters: “The White House said on Monday that a Newsweek report based on an anonymous source had damaged the U.S. image overseas by alleging that U.S. interrogators desecrated the Koran at Guantanamo Bay.”
Dirty Harry says Muslims are skeptical about Newsweek‘s retraction and has a few suggestions for the magazine on setting the record straight.
Insightful post from Unconventional Wisdom.
Oh, no. Not another name-that-scandal contest…
Newsweek fallout: Radio station cancels Newsweek show.
Update II (3:16 p.m.): An “alternative newsweekly” writer and blogger links to me. Solid. But, alas, he doesn’t approve of the post.
Tom Maguire’s got a round-up and a new blog. And no trackbacking. Rand Holman of The Daily Polemic says: “This is why the American Left should never be allowed to control national political leadership positions….The United States is always wrong.”
My young liberal friend at Down with Absolutes says:
There is no need for any more reporting on the alleged atrocities that were/are committed at Guantanamo Bay. Most of us know that some smelly happenings have been going on down there for the past four years, so this proverbial “icing-on-the-cake†to incite Muslim fanatics does no one any good.
By the way, Mike, it is absolutely fatal to be hit by a truck going 60 miles per hour. 
Karol Sheinin (met at CPAC) says:
I’m amazed at the lack of attention paid to the fact that riots ensued over this and over a dozen people died, and specifically to the fact that this is not normal and it is not what civilized people do. Why are we glossing over the condemnation of rioters in our quest to prove Newsweek did wrong?
Karol, no one is glossing over what the Muslim rioters did, but we’re angry because we expect something better from so-called responsible journalists reporting stories about the war. I expect Muslim extremists to riot and kill; I don’t expect American journalists to be sloppy in their coverage, especially with so much at stake.
But that’s just me.
Mark Tapscott (met at BlogNashville) writes:
For whatever reason, it appears Newsweek’s reporters and editors forgot Journalism 101′s First Rule: If you don’t have two independently verifiable sources for a serious allegation the publication of which could damage or destroy an individual’s reputation, put an individual at risk of physical danger or place public safety at risk, don’t publish it.
Ace of Spades (met at CPAC):
The question I’m interested in concerns these multiple-layers of fact-checking and painstaking verification I keep hearing so very much about….If Newsweek can shoot from the lip and run a thinly, anonymously sourced story just because it “feels right” to them– then why…can’t I?
Blogger Austin Bay recaps his appearance on MSNBC.
