AP releases article about * speech before it's given....OOPS

[maddezmom]

Bush: Bloodshed in Iraq Is 'Worth It'

By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer
5 minutes ago



FORT BRAGG, N.C. - President Bush on Tuesday appealed for the nation's patience for "difficult and dangerous" work ahead in Iraq, hoping a backdrop of U.S. troops and a reminder of Iraq's revived sovereignty would help him reclaim control of an issue that has eroded his popularity.

In an evening address at an Army base that has 9,300 troops in Iraq, Bush was acknowledging the toll of the 27-month-old war. At the same time, he aimed to persuade skeptical Americans that his strategy for victory needed only time — not any changes — to be successful.

"Like most Americans, I see the images of violence and bloodshed. Every picture is horrifying and the suffering is real," Bush said, according to excerpts released ahead of time by the White House. "It is worth it."

It was a tricky balancing act, believed necessary by White House advisers who have seen persistent insurgent attacks eat into Americans' support for the war — and for the president — and increase discomfort among even Republicans on Capitol Hill.

more:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050628/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush/nc:693;_

[MGKrebs]

1. Worth it for him maybe.

Reminds me of the boss firing an employee, and saying "it's nothing personal". Not personal to HIM!

[gratuitous]

2. Okay, so Bush was lying before about the reasons

But we can all trust him now when he says it's worth it.

Well, for an administration that's making millions, if not billions, skimming war profits, I suppose it IS worth it. Too bad for the rest of us, as we watch men, women, the Treasury, our national honor, our standing in the community of nations, and our prestige being ground up in the relentless mistake initiated by the Bush Crime Cabal.

[deadparrot]

3. Well, that'll be sure to win him

some friends. :eyes:

[darkism]

4. Oh, I hope he says "it's worth it."

It makes him look SO, SO BAD. The headline is definitely not flattering in its connotation.

[Mojambo]

17. I feel the same way

"It's worth it" would be a TERRIBLE phrase for him to use.

Can you imagine having lost your loved one and hear him say, "It's worth it."

I'd want to drive to Washington and rip his fucking head off.

[BurtWorm]

26. Shhhhhhhh!

Don't give them any help! ;)

[wurzel]

5. That is nerve from a draft dodger like Bush!

Perhaps Bush will go and shed some of his own! And very little of the violence is being shown on our TV networks. But the rest of the world sees it. I wonder why they hate us?

[norml]

6. I got most of it right.

Next week Americans will celebrate the 229th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence that launched our war of liberation. It's easy to forget that those early patriots faced monumental difficulties as they sought to overcome an array of failures and obstacles. But they had the vision and the courage to persevere and establish the first enduring democracy the world had then known. The people of Iraq today are in the earliest days of their struggle to build a multiethnic democracy. Ultimately, it will be up to the Iraqi people -- not the United States, not the coalition -- to rebuild and secure their country. The mission of our coalition is to create an environment, where the Iraqis themselves can contain and ultimately defeat their insurgency. It has been one year since the transfer of sovereignty to the Iraqi people. That is not very long, yet the Iraqis have accomplished a great deal, including holding an election and convening an assembly to write a constitution. We have a clear strategy for success in Iraq, and I want to be very specific about what that strategy is. We must look beyond the daily violence in Iraq and focus on the quiet process of political reconciliation that will produce a more stable and democratic Middle East. The stakes are high. We face a dangerous enemy that seeks to weaken our resolve. It is important that we finish the job in Iraq. I know it's difficult, but the United States has gone through difficult times before to come out on the other side with a more stable world. The enemy we face in Iraq are terrorists, terrorists who espouse the same ideology as those responsible for the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. After September 11 some will want us to grow complacent and forget about, or put the attacks off as a distant memory. But it does require patience and resolve to see this struggle through to the end. We have no option but to defeat the terrorists, and the terrorists will be defeated. I know it's hard to focus on the quiet process that is going on in Iraq of building a political consensus toward a stable and democratic Iraq. The key to success in Iraq is for the Iraqis to be able and capable of defending their democracy against terrorists, and we will not leave until Iraqi security forces are trained and equipped to keep the peace. The insurgents are very tough, and they're very bloody, and they can grab the headlines on any day. We have to keep focused, and I think the American people will. Iraq slowly gets better every day. We are well-positioned for continued success in Iraq. But we should be clear: There are long-term developmental challenges and much to be done. And Iraq's steady progress will be contested. Success for the coalition should not be defined as domestic tranquility in Iraq. Other democracies have had to contend with terrorism and insurgencies for a number of years, but they have been able to function and eventually succeed. Freedom is the birthright and deep desire of every human soul, and spreading freedom's blessings is the calling of our time. And when freedom and democracy take root in the Middle East, America and the world will be safer and more peaceful. We have a two-track strategy for winning in Iraq, the military and the political, and the way out of Iraq is to stay the course. The American people are rightly concerned about where we are in Iraq. I think we all want to see the troops come home sooner than later, and the way to get our troops home is to complete the mission.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1891728

[maddezmom]

7. continue with the 2 prong approach.....that's the PLAN, nothing new

He was rejecting calls to set a timetable for withdrawing 135,000 American troops. Instead, he argued for maintaining the present two-pronged strategy: equipping Iraqi security forces to take over the anti-insurgency fight and helping Iraqi political leaders in the transition to a permanent democratic government.

"The work in Iraq is difficult and dangerous," the president said. "We have more work to do and there will be tough moments that test America's resolve. ... The American people do not falter under threat, and we will not allow our future to be determined by car bombers and assassins."

Democrats and other critics said the country needed more specifics than Bush has been giving.

[CBGLuthier]

8. They did that during the debates too

Can't be sure but it seems like the day of one of the debates a "review" of it was published before it happened.

[mike_c]

9. good god, they wrote the "story" mostly from the press release...

...and they don't even bother to hide it by waiting until after he gives the speech. That is so lame. This isn't news-- it's "following the script."

[Judi Lynn]

12. It's simply dishonest, isn't it?

Apparently they aren't concerned anything NOT scripted will happen.

High disrespect for the public they allegedly are serving.

[alfredo]

10. I'm having a flashback!

"He was rejecting calls to set a timetable for withdrawing 135,000 American troops. Instead, he argued for maintaining the present two-pronged strategy: equipping Iraqi security forces to take over the anti-insurgency fight and helping Iraqi political leaders in the transition to a permanent democratic government."

sounds like Vietnamesation, and "stay the course."

[uppityperson]

11. Is it tomorrow already?

wow, that's what happened tonight? How much applause was there? Does this mean that now he doesn't have to give a speech tonight because he already did tonight? I'm soooo confused. Maybe I was so confused after the speech tonight? hold me

[patdem]

13. I do hope 'IT' was predefined somewhere in the speach..since

'IT' is a pronoun and has no meaning unless specifically identified. Like the word 'she'..it means nothing unless you know who 'she' is!

[SaveAmerica]

14. I'll have to search for that NC poll

Could it be that people are FINALLY waking up?

"In the past year, 100 troops from the several North Carolina bases have died in the war, trailing only the toll from California, according to an Associated Press analysis. A new statewide poll released Tuesday showed that, for the first time, more North Carolinians think the war is not worthwhile than think it is."

[Shakespeare]

15. Sigh. This is standard procedure for the wire services.

They get an advance copy of the speech, they write a "stock" story based on the copy, and update the story after the speech is actually given. This allows night editors to do what's called budgeting of their space (column inches in a newspaper, airtime for TV), in anticipation of how much room/time they expect to devote to the story on the speech.

This is not an error on the part of the AP, nor is it some new, conspiratorial, pro-Bush practice.

[dbt]

16. Thank you, Shakespeare. I was just about to say the same!

This has been going on for decades.

[drm604]

20. "This is not an error on the part of the AP"

I think releasing it prematurely was an error, wasn't it? :shrug:

[Shakespeare]

24. Nope.

Once it's on the wire, it's on the wire. What makes it look wrong, even though it's not an error, is that we're now in the world of instant publication thanks to the internet.

[pgh_dem]

32. Wonder what happened to their advance story on DSM that took 6 weeks

to write...
But they can write a story on a Bush event that hasn't even taken place yet.

[Shakespeare]

33. Might want to check the date of the first AP story on the DSM.

...before you get so smug. And remember, AP stories have to be picked up and actually published by a news outlet after the story is written. As I said in another post, those unfamiliar with how the AP operates might want to educate themselves before succumbing to outrage.

[Frederik]

46. AP waited a looong time before they had a story

on the DSM, didn't they? Isn't that the excuse some of the news media have used for not covering it? Or is my memory failing me?

[Shakespeare]

50. What I'm suggesting...

...is that somebody actually *check* the AP archives to see when the story was first made available to AP subscribers (which is to say, the story likely wasn't published as immediately as it was made available on the wire). I don't have a personal account with them any more, and only paying customers can access the archives (which house everything older than 7 days).

I believe we have a few DUers who are in the media, so perhaps one of them could check to see the date the first AP story was put on the wire. I'd be curious to know, too.

My guess is that the AP picked up the UK story immediately, and ran it on their international wire. What domestic news services did with it at that point is something for which the individual news outlets (and not the AP) should be held accountable.

[Frederik]

54. Thanks

I certainly agree on this: "What domestic news services did with it at that point is something for which the individual news outlets (and not the AP) should be held accountable." Even if AP didn't have a story, nothing was stopping the media from looking into it on their own.

[Bossy Monkey]

56. The AP Wire is both online and searchable

Edit: It appears that the Search function only goes back about two weeks now. Used to go back at least six months. Apologies.

The earliest hit I got for Downing Street memo is as follows:

Jun 17, 3:35 AM EDT

Democrats Urge Inquiry on Bush, Iraq

By PETE YOST
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Amid new questions about President Bush's drive to topple Saddam Hussein, several House Democrats urged lawmakers on Thursday to conduct an official inquiry to determine whether the president intentionally misled Congress.

At a public forum where the word "impeachment" loomed large, Exhibit A was the so-called Downing Street memo, a prewar document leaked from inside the British government to The Sunday Times of London a month and a half ago. Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, organized the event.

Recounting a meeting of Prime Minister Tony Blair's national security team, the memo says the Bush administration believed that war was inevitable and was determined to use intelligence about weapons of mass destruction to justify the ouster of Saddam.

"The intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy," one of the participants was quoted as saying at the meeting, which took place just after British officials returned from Washington.
(more)
http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DOWNING_STREET_MEMO?SITE=SCCOL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
To get to the Wire without the shame of appearing to be from Columbia SC, go here:
http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/fronts/HOME
and choose your own hometown paper to log in.

[pgh_dem]

47. What part of the Salon articles do you disagree with?

"AP dropped the ball on the Downing memo" June 14
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/06/14/ap_memo/

(see related Eric Boehlert articles linked to this article)

[Shakespeare]

52. I had not seen that story.

And I stand corrected on the issue of the AP and the DSM (but my other statements about how the AP handles advance stories of speeches still stand).

In post #50, I explained what the usual process would be for getting that story on the wire, and I'm very surprised they missed that one. I do know that in the past, they've picked up the UK stories critical of Bush and put them on the international wire, and they often go ignored by the US press.

edited to add: I just LOVE the comment from the USA Today editor saying that "we looked to the wires for guidance," as if they're somehow physically unable to type in the URL of any of the UK newspapers to go get the story themselves. The AP absolutely deserves blame for not getting the story on their international wire right away, but for the (presumably well-educated) editors of major news outlets to whine that they couldn't figure out how to get the details of the story because it wasn't on the newswire is absurd on its face.

[maddezmom]

27. agree, it's standard to have the copy in hand ready for release

:)

[Jack Rabbit]

29. An error in that they released it early, yes

But there's nothing sinister about it.

Now we have an idea what nonsense he's going to spout tonight. And he still won't tell us how long the insurgency will be in its last throes. Last week, Mr. Rumsfeld said the last throes may last 12 years.

[Zodiak]

28. It has always been this way...is not good enough with the AP

And it's not journalism, either. It like fast food...empty calories so they can ACT like they are journalists.

This is the same news service that couted our votes on election day and withheld info about the exit polls. So yeah...I see a pro-Bush slant to them.

And "it has always been this way" does not invalidate the idea that these people are bad journalists. It only lets us know how long they have been doing a sucky joband that doing a sucky job is institutionalized.

[Shakespeare]

31. Well, then, go right out and start yourself a wire service.

I've worked for the AP (as a reporter). I know AP reporters. Some of them are very, very good at what they do, and some are just mediocre. The ones who aren't at least mediocre don't last very long. Not every story they run is perfect or even good, but they operate on volume. That's why they're....a wire service. You might want to make yourself familiar with exactly what a wire service does, how they do what they do, and why they do what they do.

But by all means, don't let facts get in the way of a good bout of outrage.

[Zodiak]

39. Yup...I'm a freako outraged liberal who hates facts

You are not presenting facts; you are using an "I am an ex-AP reporter...and I know better than you" argument, which is unverifiable and a cheap shot if you are not who you claim to be. That is why most professionals I know do not use such arguments in an anonymous website. That is not facts vs. outrage, as you would frame this argument to make me look like a wild-eyed outrage freak who doesn't look at evidence.

And I did not dispute that the wire services do this. What I dispute is the practice because it is lazy, cheap, "meatless", and secretive. I really do not care that this has always gone on...it needs to stop was my point. This argument is punctuated by how far our news has denigrated in the last 20 years and it is time for us to look at "old practices" and see if they need to be changed.

And I am not the only one who has seen a consistently pro-US pro-Bush bias in AP stories over stories in other news wire services not owned by Moonies (yes, UPI sucks, too). The AP let us down consistently during the Bush reign, and no amount of haterating on those more outraged than thee is going to change that.

So shoot me down as a freak with your credentials if you will, but I see the AP's true colors. Plus the problem gets worse because so many papers are taking stories straight off of the AP rather than reporting themselves. I know if I had a "mockingbird" plant to put somewhere, th AP would be the best place.

So let the AP roll out that fake story a day ahead of time and say "that's business". I would wager that most here think it is a pretty shitty business. Nuff said.

[Shakespeare]

41. No, the process is not "lazy," it's done for very specific reasons.

I've detailed why in other posts. It does not need to stop, because if it stops, no newspaper is going to be able to meet its publication deadlines. Those advance stories are done for budgeting purposes.

As far as your perceived pro-Bush bias, it exists far less with the AP than with other news outlets. The AP exists primarily to crank out a certain volume of stories (hence the use of stringers in addition to staff reporters), and they have neither the time nor inclination to be biased one way or the other. I'm not sure where your accusation of "secretive" comes from--I'd like more explanation on that.

I didn't call you a freak--so don't put words in my mouth. But I do tire of ignorance masquerading as outrage, which I see far too much around here and makes those who exhibit said "outrage" look incredibly stupid.

[Zodiak]

18. the AP is no friend of America or Democrats.

The AP counted your votes and kept info about the exit polls from the American people. Do we REALLY think that this was an "oops" or just another reminder that the AP is a compromised central news source?

Piss on the AP...they are only too stupid to NOT hide that they are shills.

[Blasphemer]

19. "It's worth it" is not going to fly

If that's the argument he is going to make, he is screwed. The point is that people have already decided that it's not worth it.

[SammyWinstonJack]

21. Worth it to whom?

I wish he'd stop trying to convince us think that he actually gives a shit! He's actions speak louder then his meaningless platitudes.

[Beaverhausen]

22. well there it is...they're not going to change course at all

"At the same time, he aimed to persuade skeptical Americans that his strategy for victory needed only time — not any changes — to be successful."


Doesn't the definition of insanity include repeating the same action over and over hoping for different results?

[fishnfla]

44. I think thats the definition of stupidity, actually

either way, if he says its 'worth it', coupled with 'no changes' this speech is gonna go over like a shit omelet

[mopaul]

23. they're reading the excerpts on cnn too

[dogday]

25. There Will Be An Anti-War Protest There

there are alot of families and people who are upset about this war. No one knows better than those people who live near an Army Post.. They know the real story....

[drm604]

30. I wonder if they're watching the response to this

right at this moment and changing the speech accordingly. They can always claim later that the AP failed to verify its sources.
It will be interesting to see how closely his speech matches what this article says.

[kaitykaity]

34. What would be really embarrassing for AP would if one of those

soldiers got up and spoke his mind and was forcibly
escorted out of the room screaming profanities at the
giggling murderer. The story of record would have no
mention of it.

I wish one of those soldiers would do something like
that.

[Shakespeare]

38. No, the story would be updated to reflect that.

And actually, the story the AP is running in advance right now is pretty fair. It mentions the protestors, the MoveOn ad, and the fact that a majority of Americans now disagree with the war. That's pretty even-handed.

Here's an example of something I personally experienced with AP advance stories a long time ago (when I was just a baby journalist) that might help you guys understand a little better how the process works. In 1984, I was an editor of my college newspaper. BIG university, with a daily paper that ran both national and state news, in addition to news affecting the university community. We were, as most papers are, subscribers to the AP wire. Every afternoon, we held a budget meeting, just like they do at any newspaper. Decisions were made about which stories would run on which pages, and how many inches each would get. We'd already pulled the advance piece off the wire for Jesse Jackson's speech that night at the convention, and budgeted its location and length.

I finished my editing for the day--early evening, by this time--and went home and switched on the TV to watch convention coverage. Those of you who watched it will remember that Jackson blew the roof off the convention with his speech (which had been modified significantly from the pre-released version), and got everybody incredibly fired-up. Knowing that my lazy night editors wouldn't be checking for updates very often, I picked up the phone and called the news desk. "Are you watching the convention?" No. "Did you READ the update from the wire on Jackson's speech?" No. Idiots abound everywhere. I drove back up to the newsroom, pulled the updated story (complete with coverage of the speech's reception and crowd reaction, and accompanying photos), redrew some of the pages, and put that puppy on the bottom of page 1.

THAT is how the AP works, and that's how it's supposed to work.

[kaitykaity]

40. Interesting insight.

Thank you for sharing it.

I can't legitimately argue with what you've said. If you
say so, then it must be so.

It just doesn't seem right for the propaganda to work so
easiily and so well.

Nothing Bush says should have any credibility at all.
None. Not two sentences, much less an entire story belching
out what Bush says.

[Shakespeare]

45. Oh, I agree completely.

But even a Bush-hating reporter can't do that (blatantly, anyway) in a news story, and no matter how much we hate Bush, a speech like this is still worthy of a report. There are other ways of undermining what he says, though, and mentioning in closing that "oh, by the way, he's completely lost the trust of the American people" is one way of doing that.

[kaitykaity]

55. Depends on your definition of "worthy" I guess.

Just rename AP TASS and be done with it.

:grr:

[pilgrimsoul]

35. If it's so "worth it"

then why isn't he giving this speech at Walter Reed instead of Ft. Bragg, where soldiers have already paid with their broken bodies for his arrogant, criminal foreign policy? I guess that just wouldn't catapult the propaganda as well. If it's so worth it, then why are the American people shielded from knowing the true cost of this war in lives and limbs? Why the ban on photos of soldiers' caskets? If it's so worth it, then why are journalists covering the war being used as target practice? If it's so worth it, then why is he imposing draconian cuts on veterans benefits at a time when he should be boosting them? And finally, why has these soldiers' so-called "Commander in Chief" not attended ONE SINGLE FUNERAL of a fallen U.S. soldier in this war?

[dogday]

36. SOS

Same Ole S**t....

They know his excuses better than he does.

[Johonny]

37. Victory

How will I know I've won? This ain't a baseball game.

[brettdale]

42. HUH?

I thought his speech wasnt until 12pm EST Time????????????????

have the press whored it up a few hours early?

[merbex]

43. Does this mean I can't play Bush Bingo?

[pgh_dem]

48. Means you can spend some time crafting your card for an early win!

WOO!
:woohoo:

[B Calm]

49. Amazing how quickly the corporate press works....

[BelgianMadCow]

51. No worries. Just the final screen test.

[XemaSab]

53. Awwwww

why you gotta ruin the surprise?

why you gotta be a spoiler, man?

you should have warned us in the thread title you were going to reveal the ending.

you run a spoiler thread for Harry Potter 6, I'll have something to say about it!

;-)