MSNBC's Olbermann & Crawford Suggest Bush Team "Set Up" Newsweek (And The Story of The Yellow Kid)

MRC ^ | Tuesday May 17, 2005 | BrentBaker,Brad Wilmouth

[fight_truth_decay]

CUT

Olbermann teased the May 16 Countdown, as watched by the MRC's Brad Wilmouth: "Which of these stories will you be talking about tomorrow? After riots, after taking hits from the White House, Newsweek apologizes, says it's not sure its story about interrogators flushing copies of the Koran down the toilet was entirely correct. But what about the half dozen previous media stories claiming that? And why does a book in a toilet start riots, but a war doesn't?"

Olbermann set up his #5 story: "Good evening. What would foment more violence in this country and other western nations? Some sort of Muslim group burning down a Bible publishing plant, killing all the employees? Or the same group burning one copy of the Bible? Our answer would almost unanimously be 'Burning down the plant.' Not in the Muslim world. There, a report that the U.S. was investigating whether interrogators at Guantanamo Bay had flushed a copy of the Koran down a toilet not only preceded rioting that claimed 15 lives, but also led to strained international diplomacy, sharp words from the Pentagon and the White House about the reporting, and today a retraction from the magazine that did the reporting, even though it was not the first publication to report it. While the White House attributed anti-American rioting in Afghanistan last week to the revelation, the U.S. military itself disagreed. The violence there caused at least 15 deaths, then spread throughout the Muslim world.

"Newsweek first apologizing for the report over the weekend, and then late this afternoon, formally retracting the story. Quote, 'Based on what we know now, we are retracting our original story that an internal military investigation had uncovered Qur'an abuse at Guantanamo Bay.' The earlier apology added, 'We regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to the victims of the violence.' But did the magazine's report really cause those demonstrations in the first place? General Richard Myers, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, telling reporters at the Pentagon last Thursday that the rioting was related more to the ongoing political reconciliation process in Afghanistan than to anything else -- Koran abuse story included. Not so, says the press secretary at the White House, placing the death count, not to mention media credibility at large, squarely at Newsweek's doorstep."

Scott McClellan, on White House lawn: "It has done damage to our image abroad, and it has done damage to the credibility of the media and Newsweek, in particular. People have lost lives. This report has had serious consequences."

Olbermann: "For the record, MSNBC has a business partnership with Newsweek, especially regarding the Internet. That caveat out of the way, I'm joined now by Craig Crawford, White House columnist for Congressional Quarterly and, of course, an MSNBC analyst, also the author of 'Attack the Messenger: How Politicians Turn You Against the Media,' due for release this fall...."

Olbermann's first question: "Something smells funny to me about this Newsweek apology, then retraction. Do you sense the same thing? And what the heck are we smelling?"

Crawford, in Washington, DC with a Capitol dome backdrop, echoed Olbermann's conspiratorial world in which Newsweek was the victim of Bush administration manipulation:

"I certainly do. The facts of this case that strike me the most is the length Newsweek went to to try to vet this story before they published it. I mean, they gave it to two media officers at the Pentagon and at the Southern Command ahead of time. This story was based on the statements of a government official. And then what happens when all hell breaks loose, the government official, the source changes his story, and the government officials who have been shown the story in advance are now saying that Newsweek's responsible for something just short of murder, I suppose."

Olbermann pursued his theory: "Crazy theory based on today's developments: Newsweek quotes a government source on this, as you mentioned, then gets blasted by the White House, Newsweek apologizes but won't retract, then Scott McClellan makes himself available to the networks for interviews, a rare occurrence, in which he blasts Newsweek even further, and then late this afternoon, Newsweek retracts. Are these events interrelated or am I a victim of my own favorite logical fallacy here?"

Crawford, who also serves as a political analyst for CBS's Early Show, backed up Olbermann's grand conspiracy: "I think the dots connect, Keith. What we've seen is what we've seen before with this administration and other politicians, Democrats too, saw it in the Clinton White House during the scandal, that when the media stumbles in any way, no matter how insignificant, they try to push them right off the cliff, and that's what's happening here. I mean, this magazine did get a story wrong. It was wrong because the government official they quoted changed his story after the fact, and they are now faced with retracting the story, and that will be the lead, that's what people will focus on, and it gives the administration the upper hand here in saying that the media screwed up." Olbermann: "I am slightly mystified by Mr. McClellan's fervor. I mean, tying these deaths directly to Newsweek, when last week, as we just pointed out, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Myers, said that the rioting in Afghanistan was not tied to the story. They did an after action report in Jalalabad by the Lieutenant General Eikenberry, and he said, and it's official U.S. State Department stuff here that I'm quoting, it's not some news report of it, he said, 'The political violence was not, in fact, connected to the magazine report.' This seems to be something of a disconnect between the White House and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff."

Crawford outlined how Newsweek was supposedly "set up" by the Bush team: "Yeah, I think the White House is a little more attuned to the opportunities here for the targets of opportunity, this proposed for dealing with attacking the media. And that wasn't the first inclination of the others who talked about this. I think we, it's a bit disingenuous. Again, the government had the opportunity to see this report before it was published -- and passed. This is a pattern we've seen before, Keith. We saw it in the CBS case as bad as the supposedly fake memorandum that Dan Rather used in the 60 Minutes report on Bush's National Guard service, as bad as that was, they did show it to the administration ahead of time. It does make you wonder if sometimes they set up the news media by not taking the opportunity to say, or at the very least saying, you know, 'Give us some time to look into this. We're not sure if this is accurate or not.' But in this case, both the Pentagon and Southern Command had an opportunity to look at this story and did not raise an objection."

Olbermann bolstered Crawford's ruminations: "Yeah. 'If I'm wrong and it matters, tell me I'm wrong.' But last thing here, in terms of the politics, is this more poorly defined than perhaps the White House thinks it is? I mean, conservatives could say, as you're hearing today, 'Newsweek put this country in a bad light.' But they could also say, 'See, this is what we do to those prisoners at Gitmo.' Is it actually a tougher call on the right side of the political spectrum than it would first appear?"

Crawford: "It may be because this particular behavior, stuffing a Koran down an toilet, was reported earlier. There are other abuses that have been reported. Now, when it was reported earlier, it was on the basis of testimony from detainees themselves. What was different about this is they had a government source confirming that it was in a government report, and so you have kind of a bizarre situation where it's the government sourcing this report and now attacking the media for getting it wrong when it was the government itself that gave that story to the news media."

Olbermann: "Craig Crawford, whose new book is, 'Attack the Messenger: How Politicians Turn You Against the Media.' Pre-order your copies now. Avoid the mad crush later on."

With the kind of behavior shown by Newsweek, it doesn't take any politician to turn the public against the media.

[fight_truth_decay]

Same story written on March 9th, 2005, the Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service reported:
"(KRT) - The following editorial appeared in the Miami Herald on Tuesday, March 8: "Yet recently declassified court documents allege that, as far back as 2002, some of Guantanamo's staff cursed Allah, threw Korans into toilets, mocked prisoners during prayers and deliberately took away prisoners' pants knowing that Muslims can't pray unless covered."

Why suddenly does this becomes a HUGE story?

So when did Yellow Journalism (not to be confused with urine stained prison toilets) become so popular?

Why back "in the mid-1890s, Pulitzer (in the New York World) and Hearst (in the San Francisco Examiner and later the New York Morning Journal) transformed newspapers with sensational and scandalous news coverage, the use of drawings and the inclusion of more features such as comic strips."

"As newspapers (and our present media elite) began to compete more and more with one another to increase circulation and obtain more advertising revenue, a different type of journalism was developed by publishers Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst"(Ah..same players, different game).

"After Pulitzer (and let us not forget the Prizes! for ex., goes to : "Series exposing Vietnam atrocities" ) began publishing color comic sections that included a strip entitled "The Yellow Kid" in early 1896, this type of paper was labeled "yellow journalism." Drawn by R.F. Outcault, the popular (if now-unfunny) strip became a prize in the struggle between Pulitzer and Hearst in the New York newspaper wars. Outcault moved the strip to Hearst's papers after nine months, where it competed with a Pulitzer-sponsored version of itself.

"The Yellow Kid" (insert the Kid of any media hour) proved the first merchandising phenomenon of the comics. The character was portrayed in keychains and collector cards, (now coffee mugs,t-shirts and caps) appeared on stage and even had a short-lived magazine named after him."

"The (same) papers themselves trumpeted their concern for the "people." At the same time, yellow journalists choked up the news channels on which the common people depended with shrieking, gaudy, sensation-loving, devil-may-care kinds of journalism. This turned the high drama of life into a cheap melodrama and led to stories being twisted into the forms best suited for sales by the hollering newsboy."

Well, the newsboys are still hollaring, only the faces have changed and their hair more coifed. The need to succeed coupled with the greed for recognition; no matter how many lives it may cost from their media transgressions.

[mhking]

Great minds think alike...[g]

Related story: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1405118/posts

[KJacob]

"Craig Crawford, whose new book is, 'Attack the Messenger: How Politicians Turn You Against the Media.' Pre-order your copies now.

I wonder if Keith's two viewers will rush to their parents (or guardians) for permission to buy the book?

[Jackson Brown]

if you want to understand this -- just go to

http://www.newsweek.com -- and see what shows up.

MSNBC

[Paul Atreides]

Well, it took them a LOT longer to start that than I thought.

[fight_truth_decay]

..well maybe some will like the Yellow Kid?..when I first started this story it was clear..guess my Yellow Kid made me come in last! Apologies to you.

[Fudd Fan]

Crawford = big dope

Meltdown with Keith Olberman - who's watching? Only time I catch a glimpse is when channel surfing.

[fight_truth_decay]

Great minds think alike

*blushes*

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

More creaks from the sinking ship.

[theFIRMbss]

>I wonder if Keith's two viewers will rush to their parents (or guardians) for permission to buy the book?

They will ask the guards
to get a copy for the
building's library . . .

[toddlintown]

Look. I said this on another thread. Karl Rove set this up. HAAAAh-HAAAAH-HAAAAh!

[TexasCajun]

Isn't it MSNBC that hired the talentless Reagan as a dig to conservatives republicans?

[Socratic]

Oh yeah, right before Laura Bush is to visit the Mid East, team Bush seeks to inflame the region and spark numerous deaths. Did the world always contain so many phychos or has modern media only served to expose the madness?

[etcetera]

"...am I a victim of my own favorite logical fallacy here?"

Keith gets it right, but doesn't know it.

[dts32041]

I have heard Ketih O's staff tried to flush a bible and a Torah down the toilet as they were snorting coke.

My source refuses to be ID, but has prove reliable in the past.

[etcetera]

The press is angry because it's one of the left-wing supremes and can't be criticized - just like the judiciary.

[fight_truth_decay]

My source refuses to be ID, but has prove reliable in the past

OK..let's run with it..Make it an EXCLUSIVE!!! ;)

[Republicus2001]

There used to be a real crappy dumb sports jock reporter in LA back in the 20th century whose name was Keith Olbermann. An absolute worthless Columbia School of Broadcasting type...I wonder if this could be his son.

[Darth Republican]

On Laura Ingraham's show today, she referred to this bit of media CYA saying, "so this is what they have cooking up in the pot."

I wouldn't have phrased it like that, although 'pot' may well have been involved.

[stylin19a]

Set-up at last...I knew it...just wondered why it took so long to happen.
Though I DID say Newsweek would claim they were setup. (And Newsweek implies they were setup by saying the WH & the Pentagon didn't object to the article )