Reporter fed soldier question, or did he?

[nashville_brook]

http://tennessean.com/local/archives/04/12/62651515.shtml


By LEON ALLIGOOD
Staff Writer

One day after Spc. Thomas Jerry Wilson was called a hero for asking a blunt question of the secretary of defense, questions surfaced yesterday about whether the soldier was coached by an embedded reporter.

Spc. Wilson took Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to task for the lack of armor for vehicles of the Tennessee-based 278th Regimental Combat Team, preparing to move into Iraq from Kuwait.

Yesterday, the Poynter Institute, a continuing education facility for journalists located in St. Petersburg, Fla., and the Drudge Report, a popular daily digest of political news, questioned whether reporter Edward Lee Pitts of the Chattanooga Times Free Press helped Wilson craft his question.

<snip>

[wurzel]

1. What difference does it make? He still stood up. The question was legit!

[Supersedeas]

9. Rovian tactic of shifting emphasis from question to questioner.

Thus, softening the impact of the question itself and confusing the real issue.

[kskiska]

17. Like what they did with Dan Rather

and the TANG story. The story was legit, but the focus was on the sources and the questioner.

[gWbush is Mabus]

20. Rove: the real issue is the liberal media not the armor

[nashville_brook]

22. does Mabus refer to Nostrodomus?

seems like i was reading something about that last nite.

[nashville_brook]

21. maybe it's backfiring

maybe it's okay to question the questioner is the questioner is an evil reporter -- but if the questioner is a soldier -- a SOLDIER for crying out loud -- then doesn't someone have to listen?

aren't soldiers of the highest status in our blood cult?

[AspenRose]

33. They did the same thing with Abu Ghraib

There was more outrage over having cameras in the facilities than over what the pictures actually revealed.

[Pale_Rider]

19. And was applauded by the rest of the troops!

[Wickerman]

2. Moot point

Rummy's fumbled and disrespectful response, coupled with the soldiers' ovation are the story. Typical Rovian spin away from real content.

Who fed the question doesn't make an iota of difference. Questions are fed daily.

[nashville_brook]

11. i wonder if the unspoken spin here is that

soldiers aren't allowed to associate with reporters? aren't they kinda saying this soldier wouldn't be able to come up with the question on his own? and if someone asks for help with help with forming a question pertainent to his safety, then it shouldn't be asked?

it just feels like they are saying:
a) soldiers are too stupid to thinnk for themselves
b) reporters shouldn't be allowed to talk to soldiers
c) freedom of association and freedom of speech don't apply to soldiers

[donco6]

3. So what's wrong with getting help in crafting a question?

After all, the "embedded" reporters have been pablum-feeding us directly for years.

[nashville_brook]

4. this article is really frustrating

if Drudge is a "popular daily digest of political news" then Rush Limbaugh is a pulbic servant.

[ilovenicepeople]

5. Those damn evil communist reporters

[nashville_brook]

6. my letter to the reporter

Calling the Drudge Report a "popular daily digest of political news," is like saying Rush Limbaugh is simply a radio journalist. Drudge is extremely partisan. Characterizing Drudge otherwise is misleading. I can't imagine you would refer to Mother Jones or The Nation without the pre-fix of "liberal" or "left-leaning."

Matt Drudge does not practice journalism like you would be allowed to at the Tennessean. Maybe it used to be called Advocacy Journalism (if he advocated for "the people"), but I would suggest Drudge is nothing more than agitprop. Others might say he's a mouthpiece for the far right. At any rate, it confuses your article to hang the premise on the Drudge Report being "popular" and non-partisan by extension.

What is missing from this story (in toto, not just in the pages of the Tennessean), is the nature of embedded journalism. If this reporter has a relationship with this Combat Team doesn't it stand to reason that they might talk to each other? Do soldiers not enjoy freedom of association or freedom of speech? Isn't the bigger question here why the press isn't allowed to ask relevant questions themselves? Why are soldiers are given access to ask questions and our press isn't? Why do we embed journalists if not to get the whole story about the war? Isn't it more shocking that the only reason we know about the horrible state of affairs is thru subterfuge? And what about Rumsfeld's answer? Doesn't that merit follow-up?

I know your piece isn't op-ed. I know you are doing your best to meet the expectations of your editors, but I can't imagine that we are sending these troops to die for Iraqi democracy when they aren't allowed to practice it themselves. The last time I checked we all still have the freedom to talk to anyone we want to, journalist or not. Soldier or not.

[grasswire]

34. good letter

...and the fact that you are a Tennesseean gives it weight.

[nashville_brook]

37. not much reason to read this Gannett mess

if you aren't in nashville! we just got a new editor... maybe it will change.

[charlie]

7. Swell

As if it matters. Wilson wouldn't risk his career if the question wasn't important to him. Fucking banal, bottom-feeding librul media.

[UpInArms]

8. distracting ppl with shiny things again?

the question was asked - it doesn't matter where it originated - by a one of our military persons.

Dumsfailed blew the answer and showed his enormous ass for the enlisted men to hear first hand.

That is the story (eat shit and shut the f**k up Druggedegged, you puke)

[keithjx]

10. One step further

CLEARLY, but the level of applause the question garnered, it wasn't something that was only on the reporter's or Spc. Wilson's minds. So who cares who penned the question? It represented frustration that many of the tropps were/are feeling. Agreed that this is just typical * policy to muddy the waters.

[CatWoman]

23. well said

[Inland]

12. For our soldier hating right wing,

the real crime isn't the lack of armor, or the lack of planning, or Rummy's obvious contempt for their coming deaths and injuries,

but that the soldier was able to ask a well crafted question. The real crime is that he made good television. As long as the peons are left to stumble and hem and haw so that Rummy can use his usual rhetorical bullshit to evade any responsibility, the right wing is perfectly happy to have them die, off camera, unnoticed.

[nashville_brook]

15. and here's something else

it's like the media is saying, "if you thought this was a moment of clarity -- FORGET ABOUT IT!" there will be NO speaking truth to power here. There will be no "real" moments of outrage.

if you think you can simply speak out -- we will crush you.

anyone who thought this might have been a special moment has been put on notice -- THERE WILL BE NO MOMENTS OF TRUTH!

[MGKrebs]

13. It's just unbelievable...

and shows how much work we have yet to do.

That reporter is embedded with that unit, so he rides in the same vehicles. And it's not like he has any rank on the guys. But the media acts as if this is a story, so "people" believe this is the story.

If people believe this aspect of the story is important, it is probably already too late to change their mind. This story should bounce off before it ever enters the brain. "BS alert" should just filter it right out.

So how do we train these people to pay attention to the real story? I suppose it could go something like this: Regardless of where the question started from, the question should result in more armor getting to the guys in the field more quickly, and that would be a good thing.

I don't know what to do about the press. Soros or somebody will have to take care of that.

[nashville_brook]

18. this smacks of how the media crushed Gore

they paint what is said as ILLEGITIMATE.

this question was ILLEGITIMATE -- it was outside the bounds of legitimate discourse. therefore, they are going to use whatever means necessary to dismiss the statement -- well, it issued from an illegitimate source (a reporter).

fyi -- Juan Williams on Day To Day just responded to this story as a bad moment for Rummy. Thank goodness someone isn't killing the messenger.

[Bertha Venation]

14. Oh, Jesus Christ. Of course our soldiers don't have minds of their own --

or even opinions!

FUCK drudge.

[rocktivity]

16. I can't believe they're turning this into a scandal

and the solider who was a spinless wimp who can't take a breath unless he's under orders...oops...

:headbang:
rocknation

[malachi]

24. But it's ok when the chimp has BOTH the ?'s and answers fed to

him. Damn that liberal media. Allah bless amerika.

[jobycom]

25. See, they can't destroy him through the usual military methods

because he was front page news everywhere. If the military does it's normal payback and demotes him or ships him to worst duties, the media will see, and blame them for it.

So, they shred him in the media, make sure he's turned into a jackass pawn of the "liberal" MSM, and then they can punish him for something and no one will care. And MOST IMPORTANTLY, the other soldiers will get the message to shut the hell up.

Did you notice the crowd of soldiers bursting into cheers at the question? What reporter fed those soldiers the urge to cheer, do you think? That was way too scary to Caesar.

I love the attitude that our soldiers wouldn't be thinking day and night about such questions, wondering why they have to dig through crap to try to protect their lives.

[nashville_brook]

28. damn good point -- about the cheers

and here's the truth about being that reporter -- he's a lowly reporter for the Chattanooga Free Press. Not the NY Times or Washington Post -- and LOOK at the difference he's made. look at the ink he's generated.

if every reporter everywhere understood this point -- that speaking the truth to power is being the big fish in the shallow pond -- then maybe more reporters would actually do the job of reporting for the people and not their eidtors and their advertisers.

i'm saying explosive reprtage is EASY doings in these times! come on ya'll -- grab that brass ring!

[blindpig]

26. irrelevent

the response of the soldiers in that hall is the real story. They were overwhelmingly supportive. That's the story.

[EC]

27. Last year at this time of year

Holiday time, the Congress was talking about the arming of the vehicles and ?ing why it hadn't been done, enough $ etc. but only 1 vehicle had been retrofitted. This is ridiculous, they are stealing this money or using it for another (secret) program, they sure aren't arming the troops with it. The factories say they have told the Pentagon over and over they could double the production, not a word from the Pentagon to increase production. What a farce...I don't care who asked the ?, I just hope it did some good.

[nashville_brook]

29. what the hell did the 87 billion buy, anyway?

with all the Halliburton graff -- you would think they could spare a few bucks to provide armor!

[luaneryder]

30. Why does Matt Drudge

Hate American Troops?

[ElectroPrincess]

45. More important question ...

Why does CSPAN plug that right wing weasel's trashy web site ("It's on the Drudge Report today" --- Brian Lamb) at every DAMN opportunity? He give this moron as much clout as the major newspapers.

[luaneryder]

46. Makes no sense to me

and I have complained about all those plugs he gets; never had a reply from any of them. I'll keep plugging away at the complaints; don't cost nothing, as Jiim Belushi would have said.

[Bridget Burke]

31. So--why is it impossible for reporters to ask real questions...

Of members of the Bush administration?

Let alone our "prez" himself. When's his next "Press Conference"?

I'd heard reports of insufficiently armored vehicles for months. But they were buried--nothing came of them. As our soldiers continued to die & be maimed because Bush & Co were so cheap.

Finally, the question is on the table.

[Stinky The Clown]

32. Rathergate Redux

This is typical right wing reframing and obfuscation. Rather than address the **issue** they look for ways to attack the actors in this little morality play. Rather than address the **issue**, they look to destroy the people who had the temerity to stand up and speak.

And as in Rathergate, the issue will sink while their palaver will soar. Soon enough no one will remember that Herr Uberfuhrer Von Rumsfeld is a condescending, glib, arrogant, miserable failure. Instead they'll remember that some "liberal" **reporter** fed a question to a poor, innocent, unthinking, rosy cheeked, duped "troop".

[GoldenOldie]

36. The CON tactic

Ignore the question asked and then revert it some meaningless point and blow-it-up and keep repeating it til the initial question of importance is forgotten and therby their solution to the problem.

What reporter either in the Whitehouse, the Pentagon, or the roundtable circus's that they call analysis have the guts or the balls to ask these questions.

Give our troops enough credit to know that they are being screwed big-time by their very own Commander-in-Chief and his thugs within the Pentagon. Give them enough credit to be able to ask their leaders, paid by our tax dollars the important questions that affect their very survival. Their leaders and the talking heads keep spouting the mantra that the US Volunteer Military are the smartest and the brightest that this Nation has ever had. Well now our smartest and brightest are asking questions of their arrogant, ignorant, useless leaders beginning with the top dog himself George W. Bush and it's time for this Nation to raise up in support of the troops instead of slapping a magnetic yellow ribbon on the back of an SUV or a HUMMER and calling it your donation to the cause.

It's time to call your congressmen/women and give em hell.

[malachi]

35. Wilson one of the brain dead. No symapthy here.

Wilson said Thomas Wilson joined the National Guard in June 2003. He had previously enlisted in the Air Force in 1994 and served about four years, she said.

“It’s all about duty, and he felt compelled to be over there,” Wilson said, adding that both she and her ex-husband voted for Bush in November and support him “100 percent.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6679801/

[nashville_brook]

38. i can't go there

i totally appreciate where you are coming from -- but bushco took advantage of people's sense of duty and patriotism. the fact that the masses might be waking up is a good thing. they don't deserve to die just b/c they trusted their government.

but i do, really appreciate the sentiment.

[malachi]

41. Sense of duty + patiotism - brain = disater. I'm as patriotic and have

as much of a sense of duty as anyone else, but I sure as hell know that signing up for the chimp war machine is a bad idea. Do you really beleive that he and his wife will change into Democrats and stop supporting their dear leader?

[nashville_brook]

42. nope -- you are right

it's like what Bill Hicks used to say about gays in the military -- "Anyone DUMB enough to want to be in the military should be allowed in. that should be the only requirement."

[Bridget Burke]

39. Yes, we must believe the ex-wife!

I'm sure she knows exactly what her ex-husband is thinking right now.

[Robbien]

40. Rumsfeld's answer still was "you are screwed, just STFU"

Yes we are screwing you, you dumb cannonfodder.

[nashville_brook]

43. wow -- this is leading the hour on All Things Considered!

not "who asked the question" but why there isn't any armor!

a small glimmer of hope.

[CityZen-X]

44. Regardless

the reaction from the other G.I.'s who were present gives more credence to the question then where it came from!

[MGKrebs]

47. Update: the editor/publisher sort of apologize.

"CHATTANOOGA, Tennessee (AP) -- A newspaper should have told its readers promptly that an embedded reporter had helped frame a question that a serviceman asked of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld this week in Kuwait, the publisher says."

"In hindsight, information on how the question was framed should have been included in Thursday's story in the Times Free Press. It was not," the paper's publisher and executive editor, Tom Griscom, said in a note to readers published Friday."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/12/10/chattanooga.paper.ap/index.html

Since when does "how the question was framed" require full disclosure?

[nashville_brook]

49. since we live in bushworld

it's their reality, we just live in it

[zulchzulu]

48. The 2000 soldiers saying "Whoo yaa!" was very well scripted too

That reporter must be amazing! I wonder if he does theater too...