I've been reticent about the whole Newsweek/Koran fiasco because everybody has an opinion and they have expressed it. The one question I have for those who are harping on this issue is: What do you want to have done? Newsweek ran with a story without enough evidence. It apologized and retracted the story. Yes, people died in riots, but here is the rule of thumb, folks: When people die at the hands of others, the responsible parties are the ones who actually do the killing. That's right -- it is not Newsweek's fault that people died, no matter what some among the conservative commentariat are proclaiming. The fact is that the editors made a mistake, they admitted it, and they apologized. Some people should stop preening and wringing hands and playing demogogue and tell us what more they want to have happen. That very issue of Newsweek carried literally dozens of stories big and small, as all magazines do every issue. They screwed up big time on the one, and they admitted it. I'm not quite certain that many of the critics, including (especially?) those in this particular administration, are in much of a position to be too abrasive on this point of engaging in actions based on shoddy evidence.

Anne Applebaum's column in today's Washington Post makes some salient points, not the least of which is the fact that the story (which still may or may not be true; that Newsweek may have been premature with running it does not mean that the facts are wrong; they just cannot be confirmed -- and thus the magazine should not have run with the story) seemed plausible to those who reacted so strongly to it. The reason for this is that other (demonstrable) questionable things have been done to prisoners, with dubious effectiveness. If someone can tell me how smearing menstrual blood, real or fake, on a detainee helps us to defeat the terrorists, I'd like to hear their take. Punitive measures taken against people who have not been convicted of crimes seems to me a pretty good way to start blurring the lines that separate and make us better than the enemy. It seems to me that a culture that makes stories of soldiers flushing the Koran down the toilet plausible has a great deal of explaining to do. Newsweek at least has had the courage to stand up and admit its errors.

Jason Nelson - 5/20/2005

Mr. Catsam,

The bigger point is that the mainstream media is not content to inform America, they are anxious to direct American opinion and desire to guide American policy. I agree, Newsweek can do little more today to atone for the mistake. What concerns me is that Newsweek wanted this story to be true so much that they cut corners to get it out. This is the same publication that refused to cut corners on the Lewinsky story because they were so concerned about getting it right.
There is a severe liberal bias in the mainstream media, and America is more aware of it now than ever. Rather than the Rather incident injecting caution and the importance of professionalism into the decision making process of these mainstream news organizations, it seems to me those in charge are simply more anxious to break the big story to take Bush down, journalistic methodology be damned.
Further, I am disappointed in your reaction. It seems to me that you are saying that it doesn’t matter if the story can be confirmed you still suspect that it is true. I guess this kind of thinking is why it is said that a lie can travel half way around the world before truth can finish tying its shoes. Again, you seem willing to believe anything that advances your own positions, regardless of whether or not it’s true.
In closing, I disagree that there is "a culture that makes stories of soldiers flushing the Koran down the toilet plausible", rather there is a climate in American discourse primarily CREATED by politically motivated media obsessed with anything anti Bush, anti American, anti Iraq War. It is easy to see why you are inclined to miss this distinction, I suspect that you have bought the climate that the liberal news organizations are selling and you truly believe that it is a pervasive "culture" that is the problem. I implore you to reconsider, perhaps moderating your view.
The Bush administration, the Pentagon, the State Department have been consistent in expressing respect for everyone's religion. The Abu Ghrab problem has been handled in a transparent way, with those responsible being punished. This is not the 1960's and this is not Vietnam, no matter how many of those journalists who either cut their teeth in that era or who grew up wishing to become like those who did want it to be.
In closing, journalists should return to informing America with facts, or to put it another way, verifiable truth. To journalists of America, it is not your job to guide my thinking or change the world; it is your job to inform. If you want to change the world, run for office.