Comments on: McClatchy vs. Scott McClellan on the road to Iraq

By: Adrian Monck

Adrian Monck — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 20:31:18 +0000

BTW you're not Professor of Medieval History, David Crouch are you? Or - crazy guess here - Socialist Workers Party luminary and Media Workers Against The War David Crouch?

By: Adrian Monck

Adrian Monck — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:55:18 +0000

I've got feelings you know! I actually said it better here, and probably cheaper too.

By: David Crouch

David Crouch — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:40:17 +0000

I obtained the book and was disappointed to find the issue superficially and perfunctorily discussed on a single page. Poor show.

By: Adrian Monck

Adrian Monck — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:35:57 +0000

Take a look back at the reporting of the 45 minute dossier across the papers (plug: which I do in my book). You’ll find plenty of scepticism…

Of course, the public doesn’t always want scepticism.

By: David Crouch

David Crouch — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:04:45 +0000

Can Ari Fleischer really be considered a convincing source in this debate? More eloquent, surely, are the apologies for their Iraq coverage from the New York Times and Washington Post, and the new book by the editor of E&P. For the UK context we have the sophisticated academic research by Justin Lewis at Cardiff, backed up by the extensive work from Piers Robinson at Manchester that is just beginning to appear in print, demonstrating the UK media’s credulous attitude (with obvious exceptions) towards the government’s case for regime change

By: Adrian Monck

Adrian Monck — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 18:12:32 +0000

And this from Ari Fleischer:

The press did ask the hard questions, repeatedly. Based on the CIA's conclusions, many of the president's and my answers turned out to be wrong, but you can't blame the press for either the CIA's reporting or decisions reached by the president. It's important to recognize that regardless of the outcome of the war in Iraq - an outcome still being written - the press didn't cause it to happen or otherwise enable it.

By: Adrian Monck

Adrian Monck — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:11:23 +0000

Their point is that McClatchy as a major US news organization did question the administration line. I was casting that as a rebuttal to Nick D’s point was that no one had.

By: David Crouch

David Crouch — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 13:58:46 +0000

Hardly a rebuttal. Strobel and Landay’s blog posting cited here in fact attacks the US media for doing the very things Scott McClellan accuses them of. Their point is that McClellan’s remarks are “not news” — McClatchy was one of the few news outlets to interrogate the administration and publish news stories that contradicted the White House line on Iraq