|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Feature
|
|
Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
Current rating: 0 |
by Peter Miller
(No verified email address) |
09 Feb 2003
|
|
Ever eager to support their president, N-G editors condemn people who question him, and hide facts that might help people evaluate his character and his motives. Also, critique of News-Gazette General Manager John Foreman and a suggestion that he dis-serves the community by belittling reasons to oppose this war. |
Photo: John Foreman, News-Gazette Editor and General Manager
Friday, February 7, 2002: News-Gazette Editorial, "World must decide who's worthy of trust".
"Who should the international community believe: the United States and its British allies, or Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein?"
"Powell, in a one-hour presentation, used electronic intercepts, satellite photos and reports from intelligence sources and defectors to portray Hussein as a despot determined to deceive the world community."
Saturday, February 8, 2002: Chicago Tribune, "Britain lifted old material for new Iraq report" (no version of this article appeared in the News-Gazette).
"The British government acknowledged Friday that large sections of it most recent report on Iraq, praised by U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell as a "fine paper" in his speech to the UN on Wednesday, had been lifted from magazines and academic journals."
The British government posted the document to the prime minister's website and depicted it, "as an up-to-date and hightly unsettling assessment by the British intelligence services if Iraq's security apparatus and its efforets to hide it activities from weapons inspectors."
However, sections of the report "were plagiarized -- to the extent that even spelling and punctuation errors in the originals were reproduced in the government document."
The Guardian goes into more detail (see the first link, below):
"But on Channel 4 News [Thursday] night it was revealed that four of the report's 19 pages had been copied - with only minor editing and a few insertions - from the internet version of an article by Ibrahim al-Marashi which appeared in the Middle East Review of International Affairs last September.
"The content of six more pages relies heavily on articles by Sean Boyne and Ken Gause that appeared in Jane's Intelligence Review in 1997 and last November. None of these sources is acknowledged."
Not a word about any of this appeared in Champaign-Urbana's finest news source (cf. www.theonion.com), the News-Gazette.
Instead, General Manager John Foreman used his Sunday column to issue personal attacks against Urbana City Council member Danielle Chynoweth for sponsoring an anti-war resolution which the council approved last Monday.
Foreman, a lock-step adherent to Bush's call to war, wrote, "Almost all of the sentiments [expressed during public comment periods at the Urbana City Council meetings] seemed more genuine than those of resolution sponsor Danielle Chynoweth. She insisted the isue was about what was good for Urbana and explained her thinking with a sort of Alice-in-Wonderland argument that the council was focusing atention on foreign affairs so the federal government could be free to concentrate on problems in Urbana."
He continues, "Do [war opponents] think Colin Powell is lying?"
Aside from betraying Foreman's expert ability to assess a woman's character (the FBI could probably use a lie detector like him), his screed raises a good question: should we trust what Colin Powell, George Bush, and the others tell us about Iraq?
Foreman has apparently forgotten the buildup to Gulf War I, during which a young Kuwaiti woman testified before the US Congress that Iraqi soldiers were removing babies from incubators in Kuwait and leaving them on the hospital room floor to die. A number of US Senators cited her testimony as a reason for their approving Bush I's Gulf War, but two years later, her story was shown to be a public relations lie, fabricated by Washington firm Hill & Knowlton for the exiled Kuwaiti royal family. The woman testifying was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US. (See the second link below for a recent column about the lie, published in the Christian Science Monitor.)
I think it's fair to say that we don't know if Powell is lying, and that doesn't mean we should trust Saddam Hussein, either--despite Foreman's claim that war opponents must trust him. (Try to follow the logic yourself: you either support Bush or you're a terrorist/apologist for Saddam Hussein/child molester, etc.)
The public has dozens of reasons to question Bush's motives. His vice president's former company, Halliburton, is reaping windfall profits from services provided to the hundred thousand US troops in the middle east. Bush himself isn't a very trustworthy figure, given that his largest campaign contributor was close friend Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron, which suffered largest bankruptcy in US history, costing thousands of people their retirements and their jobs. Bush's Army Secretary, Thomas White, ran Enron's energy trading firm, which illegally manipulate energy markets and helped force brown-outs across the state of California.
And then there's the economy. Before Bush stopped the Bureau of Labor Statistics from reporting on Mass Layoffs in December, it was clear that the economy was sinking. In Bush's first two years, 69,000 jobs were lost every month. Unemployment has nearly doubled since he came into office, and Thursday's "good news" was that the low-wage retail sector forced 0.3 percent of the unemployed to stop claiming unemployment benefits.
How about our schools? Bush made a first-class public relations ordeal of signing the "No Child Left Behind Act", (a.k.a. the No Schools Left Standing Act), promising new resources to accompany new testing requirements. Yet, as Sen. Dick Durbin noted in January,
"As soon as the floodlights had dimmed and the television cameras had left, we learned something in this town of secrets, about a secret that had been kept by the administration. The secret was this: The President was prepared to sign the bill to approve the plan. The president was not prepared to put the Federal dollars on the table to make it work. As a consequence, we stand here today with mandates from this No Child Left Behind on school districts in States across America and the Bush White House refuses to fund those mandates."
This year, 85% of Illinois school districts are running deficits (Education Week, 11/6/02). In Urbana, the deficit is $3 million. Should we call on the federal government to support our schools? Do our schools lose out when the military budget rises to $400 billion, with a commitment to spend $2.7 TRILLION over the next 6 years? (www.cdi.org)
None of this merits comment from the News-Gazette, only bashing of people who might raise those issues.
News-Gazette managers implore us to support "independent local newspapers" like the News-Gazette. They cite declining readership as an alarming sign, and rather than look internally, they blame the nonreading public for their problem.
Another explanation for poor circulation may lie in the gross imbalance of the paper's editorial page, regular personal attacks on political leaders with whom they disagree (and coddling of those who they like), insults toward readers with whom they disagree, and selective omission of "inconvenient" facts for the paper's poor reputation with a significant portion of the public.
Recommendation for improvement at the News-Gazette? Fire the editors.
|
See also:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,3605,890898,00.html
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0906/p25s02-cogn.html
|
Comments
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by anon
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
09 Feb 2003
|
|
What happened to all the comments that were attached to this article before it was moved to the main section?! |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
09 Feb 2003
|
|
Techical problems with Dada made the comments become unattached. They will be back, but it may be tomorrow. We're working on it. |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by anon
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
09 Feb 2003
|
|
RightOn, thanks ML. |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by Joe Parnarauskis
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 7
10 Feb 2003
Modified: 09:19:25 AM |
|
The News Gazette has always been the mouth-organ for the Republican Party of East Central Illinois and Republican policies nationally/internationally. With the demise of the Courier newspaper years ago, their political agenda/news reporting is nothing less than a monopoly promoting right-wing ideations. I fondly remember a slam coined years ago, truly a term of endearment describing the News Gazette as the Nazi Gazette. That term is ever more appropriate today. |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by Sascha Meinrath
Sascha (nospam) ucimc.org (verified) |
Current rating: 4
10 Feb 2003
Modified: 09:29:21 AM |
|
I too was taken aback by John Foreman's ad hominem attacks on Councilwoman Chynoweth. Recently, the grandson of Mahatma Gandhi had lunch with several friends of mine. At this lunch, he stated that the Urbana City Council and the debate surrounding the peace resolution were an exemplar of democracy in action. It is disheartening that Mr. Foreman's take on this exact same process is so negative, blaming, and spiteful. |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by thorn
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 4
10 Feb 2003
Modified: 09:45:47 AM |
Yeah, that's how I think of them, like a "conservative" newsletter or 'zine. No used even sweating 'em, the Web leapfrogged their antiquated distro model, long ago. The Web, and AdobeIllustrator and a Xerox machine.
Indignant and angry at being "called out", just like Bush&Co.,Inc.
They're not even on the radar; what a joke of a "newspaper". They're nothing more than an embarrassment to our community, just like Chief Illiniwek.
'Course they have their target audience, and that's OK. They can posture all they want, there ARE alt. news sources in every direction, and have been for several years now.
Let 'em bluster and bellow; their tin-soldier soapbox is pitifully obvious nowadays. Their local monopoly on mass-media ended a long, long time ago.
Don't let 'em spin you up. I propose simply ignoring them, they're almost insignificant. |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest, Latest Whopping Omission |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 7
11 Feb 2003
|
The News-Gazette always manages to one-up itself when it comes to yellow journalism of the Republican type. After hearing news reports yesterday about a new plan to be advanced by France and Germany to increase the size of the UN inspection teams in Iraq, as well as supplementing it with armed peacekeepers and reconnaisance flights, I expected to read at least something about the proposed plan in the Sunday morning edition.
What readers got was Rumsfeld's "livid" (as described in the NY Times, not the N-G) reaction to the new plan with bitter charges against these Europeans efforts to avoid war by giving the inspection teams the time to complete their job (which is what the US _claims_ to want) and more teeth to make it work. Oh, and there is a Henry Kissinger screed against Europe on the front of the editorial section. But _absolutely_ nothing about the reports of the new plan itself, which will make it obvious to the world whether the US really wants Iraq's disarmament -- or simply a war to seize its oilfields.
Then Foreman launches into a new round of Urbana-bashing claiming that the time spent on the resolution against war might have been better spent on finding a new business to replace the soon to close K-Mart.
Foreman does not even bother to explain the obviuos contradiction in why a government, which under capitalism is supposed to let market forces decide what business comes to a community, should be dabbling in getting busines started in Urbana. I guess this is because he really feels that bringing up the "wonder of the market" should only be invoked when government is asked to to "interfere in the market" when it is petitioned to make paying public workers at least a Living Wage official policy. Foreman is a man who never saw a corporation that didn't need another handout from government and never saw a worker who didn't simply need to be told that they should be happy that they even get paid the minimum wage.
The News-Gazette, never a paper that lets the facts stand in the way of the jingoistic desires of its editorial board. |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by anon
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
11 Feb 2003
|
The SnoozeGazoo is a business, serving the largest market in Champ.County, the conservative, provincial segment. They have their place, and it's to tell their customers what they want to hear. Standard procedure in communities like ours.
From where I sit, they don't even register on the(my) radar.
I know I'm not saying anything y'all didn't already know, just wanted to vent. |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by RDR
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 3
11 Feb 2003
|
Isn't it a newspaper's job to assume the possibility that their sources are lying and do adequate fact checking?
Bush Sr. lied to the Saudies with false satallite photos of a massive Iraqi military build-up on their border to get them on board for the first Gulf war. These were later proved to be fake.
If Powell can find photos of decomination trucks, which looked like vans to me, why couldn't he get satellite photos of the mobile labatories? After all they look moch more distinctive than those decomtamination vans.
Almost nothing he said is verifyable by a neutral party. If he had adequate evidence to start a war, killing tens of thousands, wouldn't he want to invite verifycation?
He could have given the name of the Iraqi defectors and detainees. We can provide their safty after all we do it all the time in the witness protection program, and the detainees are in our prison camp.
Can we trust the word of detainees? Wouldn't you say anything your captors want to hear to get out of the prison camp? Not to mention to stop the torcher.
Also wasn't the US in voilaton of the UN resolution by witholding this "evidence" of weapons of mass distructions from the weapons inspectors?
And about Chynoweth's asserion that this war will cost Urbana, how about proving that it will help Urbana. Well, on second thaought, it might help Danville where the VA hosbpitol is located when the vetrans come back with radiation poisioning from depleated uranium.
I fear America was once agan snoockered by a confident sounding man in a smart suit. Remember Ollie North? |
|
Missing Comments Restored |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
11 Feb 2003
|
|
The three comments right above this one were posted with the original article and were lost when it was made into a feature. Since I could not figure out how to restore them and no one else has had time to, I have manually reposted them here. They were originally the first three comments posted. |
|
To Thorn: Hard To Ignore Completely |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 3
11 Feb 2003
|
While I agree with Thorn that we should not spend too much time wringing our hands over the News-Gazette's slanting of the news in itself, I disagree with the suggestion to do nothing.
The N-G enjoys a monopoly position as the only daily local paper. Thus it comes into the homes of thousands of more people than the IMC everyday, trying to set the agenda for local government. Although its influence is slipping badly (just look at how much that their editorial board has railed against, but which the voters have supported, in the last few years), it is still a significant source of misinformation in the service of power. It would be a mistake to ignore its worst excesses completely. |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by thorn
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: -1
11 Feb 2003
Modified: 12:26:14 PM |
|
Point taken (re: the NG's wider distribution), MH. But what're you gonna do, shame 'em into behaving more evenly/fairly?
To me, it's a similar situation to the Chief Illiwek struggle. You can't make the Chief supporters change their mind, but you can continue to support your position in your own forum. That's all you can do. The reason we still have "The Chief" around, is because too many people that can enable a change, don't think there's any harm being done. I know I'm not expressing anything new here.
What good does it do to be upset at the NG for their blatantly "conservative", one-sided viewpoint? Is pointing it out, making any difference? I'm not saying we should "give up", just that calling them on it, seems to have zero affect.
They're a business, and obviously their bosses/owners are satisfied (enough) with their style, that they've not only not made any changes toward fairness, they've actually gotten "worse".
Again, I understand what you're saying ML, but I don't think we/you should expend any (or much) of our valuable energy toward the NG. I would feel different if they were the only source of that kind of mass-media in town, but they're not.
Their target audience already agrees with most of what they print, so I don't perceive there being much of a danger that they'll sway anyone that wasn't already on their "side" to begin with. Do you (perceive a danger)?
I'm also aware that the original article here was somewhat of an effort to defend Ms.Chynoweth, one of our own. That's not to say that this goal was without merit, though.
I'm still very glad Mr.Miller's post/article appeared here to begin with - keep 'em coming! |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by Edward Geiger
etgphoto (nospam) juno.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 5
15 Feb 2003
Modified: 11:36:58 AM |
|
This call for War started to take OUR MINDS off the ecomomy,the CEO's stealing from the American people,and the elections.He cried Wolf and now must go to War to save face and have American's die so his gang can make MORE MONEY.And non of his Family or those who want this War will see their children die. |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by Ricky Baldwin
baldwinricky (nospam) yahoo.com (verified) |
Current rating: 0
16 Feb 2003
|
|
The worst part about the story (that the NG ignored) about the British report, in my opinion, was not that it was plagiarized, as some other US media have mentioned. The real problem was that much of the information is seven to twelve years old, or even older, as pointed out on a recent story on Democracy Now by the professor who discovered the plagiarism. Remember, the Bush Administration trotted out a twelve-year-old report once before because it claimed Saddam Hussein was "months away" from developing nuclear weapons (before the Gulf War and UN weapons inspectors completely destroyed this capability). |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by JustMe
notavail (unverified) |
Current rating: 3
18 Feb 2003
Modified: 02:25:56 AM |
The News-Gazette is a Good Ol' Boys Rag; it focuses on and features putting down the downtrodden (espec. the locals) and uplifting its own Patriarchal-Lawyer-Editor-Owners... Quick perusal of their classified ads/announcements shows where their distorted values/priorities are...
It's yellow journalism at its worst, not even fit to line the bird-cage... :-( |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by curious
curious (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
18 Feb 2003
|
|
How do classified ads tell you anything about a newspaper's editorial stance? |
|
Re: Gazette's Latest Whopping Omission |
by Dorothy Martirano
esofea (nospam) ix.netcom.com (verified) |
Current rating: 0
20 Feb 2003
|
|
I didn't notice mention of the fact that part of the text of Powell's plagarized comments were from a source at least 10 years old...I think if was a grad student thesis. |
|
