I just had an email exchange with Shep Smith about this about an hour ago or so.
After he was railing against paying these papers on his Studio B show I sent him an email:
___
Shep,
Why do you insist our military should fight this war with one hand tied behind its back?
If they were printing lies that's one thing, but come on! We want our troops to finish the job and come home. If this helps then I'mm all for it.
___
Paying for story selection is something we don't do.
That's why the government is investigating.
Any journalist who accepts money to cover a story would be fired.
It's my hope that we'll lead by example as we help the Iraqis establish a democracy.
Buy space in the paper as advertisement, label it as such, and put out word of the good work the U.S. military is doing?
Sure.
Buy news stories?
No. We don't do that in America. Just as we don't torture, presume guilt or abuse.
Lead by example. We're America, after all.
___
I understand where you are coming from to an extent. But I feel the media is giving us half the story. What do these stories say?
You make it sound like the military is forcing these papers to accept money and to print stories. If the government offered you money to accept a story you would decline and you have that right. Do the Iraqi papers not have the right to accept?
From my understanding these are editorials are written by our troops.
As you guys in the media often say, "If it bleeds, it leads." That's well and good and an indication of human nature, but by the media only covering the bad news I feel it gives the wrong impression about the work our troops are doing and in turn puts them that much more in danger.
If paying these papers will save American lives then I've got no problem.
By labelling it as advertisements you undercut the validity of the message. This is a war, Shep. Psy-ops rule, baby!
___
In a democracy the press is free and independent from the government.
It's one of the hallmarks of democracy.
We're trying to help establish a democracy in Iraq.
We must lead by example.
Paying for "news" articles or accepting money to print such is unethical in a democratic world.
If money changes hands consumers of information must know that.
Period.
___
I hear ya...
it may be unethical... but is it illegal? The military didn't force these papers to print these stories or editorials or whatever they were. They were free to tell the military to go take a flying leap and they chose not to. What's more democratic than that?
I want to know... how many stories? what did the stories say? how much money? who wrote them? would our military give them money for infrastructure concerns whether they printed them or not? the military is handing money out all over Iraq.
can't we wait until this part of the GWOT has been won before we take all of our psy-op tools away?
You're right about torture, but compared to Abu Graib this is small potatoes.
Thanks for your time. Is this really Shep?
___
Yes. It's Shep.
May I respectfully suggest that you read up on the role of media in a democracy.
(Insert your comment here about the quality of coverage you get. That's not the point)
The media must be free of influence from the government.
It's one of the hallmarks of democracy.
We are watchdogs, among other things, for the people.
I take that responsibility very seriously and am honored to be serving you and the nation.
That's how I see it.
Should a government try to pay me for influence on story selection I'll report to you on that attempt.
You don't accept the money. You report on the government for trying.
As Iraq works, with our guidance and assistant, to establish a democracy we must lead by example.
Shepard
___
Thanks, Shep. Like I said before I understand where you are coming from and I'm very appreciative of your work and your dilligence to reporting the truth wothout receiving any influence.
I just feel, and I wished you understood this as I understand you, that we have a unique situation in Iraq.
I support the war in Iraq and by doing so I feel responsible for the American troops over there. To me this is a question of priorities. It is more important to protect our troops as much as possible than making sure there is a completely free press over there currently. As long as they don't lie to the people, of course. That would be as bad as Abu Graib.
We can tackle the free press angle after our troops have completed the job.
___
Then his next show started and I haven't gotten a response.