Wednesday, October 1, 2003
(Via Instapundit) This sounds like an exchange I wish I'd seen:
Joey the Lemur: 60 Minutes of idiocy
What I saw and heard next was simply unbelievable. Scott Pelley interviewed an Iraqi who claimed to be part of the Fedayeen. This cretin went on to describe why he wanted to kill Americans and shared that he had been involved in 4 attacks already (my guess is that it's probably more). He went on to explain that he would cut the head off of any American soldier he might capture. It would make him "so happy". Though I didn't time it, this SOB had several minutes to spout his beliefs and Pelley was baiting him with questions like "what would you tell the American people?"
I have 2 cousins in Iraq & have one question for Pelley: Whose fucking side are you ON??!!
This moron (an American, in case he forgot) sat across from an enemy of America & DID NOTHING (aside from letting him spout his propoganda).
Cut to an interview with Paul Bremer & the exchange went something like this:
Pelley - I spoke with a man who claimed to be with the Fedayeen & was avowed to kill American soldiers. He...
Bremer (interrupting) - Did you arrest him??
Pelley (clearly taken aback) - Uh, we don't have the authority to arrest anyone.
Bremer - Did you turn him over to the authorities or military??
Pelley - Uh, we're just here to report...
Bremer - Well, listen. Next time you find someone like that, call me & I'll come arrest him.
Yea Paul!!! Give it to him!![...]
This war, the lead-up, the event itself and the aftermath have certainly brought a plethora of media issues to light.
My fictional conclusion to the exchange:
Pelley: Well, we in the press need to remain impartial...Bremer: Impartial? You expect me to nod and say I understand...that it's OK. Well I don't understand, and it's not OK. Are you an American or not? That man said he wanted to cut your neighbor's throat and you did nothing about it.
Pelley: But if we take action, it would put us at risk. We wouldn't be able to get such interviews and bring in such stories.
Bremer: Why is it so important for you to be the one who interviews that man? Why not let the reporters from Al Jazera talk to him and get the film from them? I ask again. Are you an American or not? What side are you on? Believe me, Al Jazera knows what side they're on. The bottom line is, we won't agree on this. You expect me to validate you in your feigned impartiality and I won't. Now ask your next question.
The press wants to operate by its own set of moral laws, and that leads to all sorts of situations like the one above, like Eason Jordan's admission of CNN's coddling of Hussein, like John Burns' revelations on the behavior of journalists, and like the infamous Wallace/Jennings exchange and on to the "sexing up" of reports by the BBC and all sorts of agenda-driven story-writing. Maybe the press will just have to accept the fact that they operate on their own set of morals - a set of morals that a lot of the rest of us simply won't validate for them. Maybe that's OK for them - that's their decision to make. I know we all want the story, but maybe there are some things that are just beyond the pale - some things that just ought not to be done. After all, doctors don't do certain types of experiments on human subjects. It's unethical. The press needs to re-examine its standards. Maybe "get the story"...no matter what...is just not acceptable.
Exactly my point, Solomon. This "moral relativism" and "neutral observer" crap among the press just makes no sense. Thanks for fleshing it out.
BTW, I loved how you finished the bit. I would have liked to seen outtakes or off-camera discussions. At least CBS had the guts to broadcast that little spat. I'll give 'em that much.