Replies

http://sisypheanmusings.blogspot.com/
It's Bigger than Jordan
During the Memogate scandal, I wrote a number of posts that the problem in the media was bigger than Dan Rather. I still believe that.

The problem is journalists reporting as fact what they believe to be true. This "Truth" is their Master Narrative. CBS News and 60 Minutes II had a Master Narrative in 2004 about President Bush's National Guard Service more than 30 years ago. All the "evidence" that supported that Truth was reported, including fake memos forged with LtCol Killian's signature and a softball interview with Barnes. All the evidence that challenged that "Truth" never made the air.

That's the danger with Easongate. It reflects a Master Narrative. Dr. Andrew Cline described the making of a Master Narrative during the Presidential campaign:
No matter the source, a master narrative is generally constructed this way:
A pattern of behavior is noticed.
The behavior is characterized, i.e. given a name.
The character is portrayed as part of a plot, i.e. a set course of actions, consistent with the character, beginning with a central tension and leading to a climax and denouement.
The candidates words and actions are analyzed by comparing them to the character and the plot.
That's what I think we are seeing here. Journalists have been killed, that's the pattern. Targeting is how it is being characterized. The military is the character portrayed as part of this plot to target journalists consistent with the media's perception of the military. Everything the military says and does is being analyzed according to the plot to target journalists.

Nik Gowing wrote (pdf):
There is a growing fear that some governments - especially the most militarily sophisticated like the United States and Israel - are sanctioning the active targeting of journalists in war zones. The evidence is that they want to shut down what we are there to do - to bear witness and report.
Chris Cramer, CNN International's managing director, picked it up and spread it from the INSI podium:
From Nik Gowing on the worrying trend of journalists who died at the hands of the coalition - in the crossfire - through screw ups - however you want to portray it.
Eason Jordan reinforces the rumor in front of an international audience at the World Economic Forum. Richard Sambrook confirms this meme exists in the journalistic community:
[Eason Jordan] clarified this comment to say he did not believe they were targeted because they were journalists, although there are others in the media community who do hold that view (personally, I don't).
Charles Krauthammer sums up Easongate nicely:
But then [Jordan] says in a statement that has been released, he never has believed that American troops have deliberately attacked journalists. Well, if he doesn't, why is he spreading a rumor that he believes is false, malicious, libelous, and will endanger American troops?
Perhaps, it is because it is part of Eason Jordan's (and others) mental model. They believed their own initial rumors and news speculation that the military was targeting them. No amount of contrary evidence can now shake them from that belief. All that's left is to hunt for the evidence, real or not, confirming what they already know to be true. That's why Jordan was greeted with accolades from members in the WEF audience for his courage to speak 'the Truth'.

Jordan says now that he doesn't believe that journalists are deliberately targeted by the military, but everything we have tells us that he and others do think that. That would also be the obvious motivation for Jordan to mention it at the Forum. The session wasn't about whether journalists were being targeted by the military, but it was obviously weighing heavily on Jordan's mind.

Are we now to believe that Jordan has changed his thinking? That from now on he will speak out against the journalistic meme that the military is targeting them? I see no reason to believe that. He may be more careful about spreading the rumor, but I think he still believes it.