Reckless reporting: CNN, the Boston Marathon bombing, and the relentless rush to be first

By Michael J.W. Stickings

So were you following what was happening today -- not just in real life, but in the media's (atrocious) reporting of real life? Whether you were on Twitter or surfing through the 24/7 cable news channels, or whatever, it was impossible to miss. There were were all manner of rumors flying around, and all manner of speculative reporting masquerading as "breaking news," but basically, the thing to know is that CNN got it pretty much entirely wrong, reporting that an arrest had been made when, of course, there was no arrest at all. (John King was the one who got it wrong on TV. On its website, the now-changed headline was "Authorities arrest suspect in Boston bombings, source says.")

This is not to say that CNN should take the fall for what is a much broader problem in the media (the rabid quest to be first, for example, to "win," which leads to what happened today). It's just that today of all days, with so much attention on the aftermath of the Boston Marathon attack, and with everyone desperately searching for clues and even more so for answers, for some sort of resolution, if not also for justice, for some explanation, for the who, what, and why, for the responsible, yes, with all that, it was CNN blew it. As I tweeted:

See, it's not that there's a liberal bias in the media, it's that there's a reckless, irresponsible, stupid bias. Thanks @cnn! #bostonattack
— Michael Stickings (@mjwstickings) April 17, 2013

And it was TPM that did us all a great service with this mash-up of CNN's reckless irresponsibility:


Look, I don't want to go too hard on this. You're a reporter, or an editor, or whatever, you hear things, you have to make what seems like a split-second decision, and, well, mistakes are often made. A lot of the time, news outlets do admirable work and get it right, and it's rather unfair for any one outlet to be brought down by a single mistake, or even for its various mistakes to define it entirely.

But this was bad. And unnecessary. And, alas, not so much the rare exception -- not just at CNN but everywhere in the media -- but yet another example of what's wrong with the media. (Fox News and that sort of hyper-partisan media outlet are a separate problem. I'm talking about news reporting here, about getting the story out, not spinning it for political purposes.)

CNN pulled back, as it had to, and is now, like others, taking things more slowly, cautiously:

Investigators have pinpointed two men as "possible suspects" who were seen in images near the finish line of this week's Boston Marathon -- moments before twin bombs there exploded, killing three and injuring about 180 others -- a law enforcement official said.

A circular sent out Wednesday to federal and state agencies features the photos "in an attempt to identify the individuals," who were described as being of "high interest" to investigators.

Okay, that's all we know. For now.

We rely on the media, including CNN, to tell us what's going on, but what we don't need, particularly at a time of mass confusion following a major tragedy, is for them to lead us into ever deeper levels of uncertainty in their rush to be first.

We all want to know more, but let's make sure what we know, and what we are told, is right.

Craziest Pundit of the Day: David Gergen

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Okay, let's start a Craziest Pundit of the Day series. (Given all the material, it was only a matter of time.) And let our inaugural winner be that smug, self-important advisor to so many presidents, David Gergen.

**********

A short while ago, R.K. Barry, one of our fine co-bloggers, e-mailed me this:

Do you fucking believe that David Gergen just said on CNN that Democrats bear responsibility for the violent tone of political debate in America because their "mal-governance led to a citizens' revolt"? And of course John King sat there and said nothing. They are both assholes.

Have a good night. 

That hardly helps me to have a good night. David Gergen, sort of like David Broder, likes to position himself as an above-the-fray independent, but most of his punditry serves the right, including the Republican Party, by lending it media-sanctioned legitimacy. (Because the media, and particularly CNN, spins the lie that Gergen is non-partisan, legitimately, and utterly sound in his punditry.) And John King, of course, is nauseatingly Republican-friendly. (Think back to the glee he expressed back in November.)

This is among the stupidest things Gergen has ever said. What he is essentially saying, if we really get down to it, is that Democrats don't have a right to govern, that their authority is somehow illegitimate, that they shouldn't have done anything even with the White House and solid majorities in both houses of Congress.

And what, exactly, did they do? Pass health-care reform, which is supported (either the Affordable Care Act or a more progressive package of reforms) by a majority of the American people -- a reform package that a Republican, Mitt Romney, passed in Massachusetts and that, for the most part, Republicans themselves were in favour of back in the '90s as an alternative to "Hillarycare"? Pass an economic stimulus package that, owing to Republican objections, was much smaller than it should have been (but that still pulled the economy back from the brink)? Pass DADT repeal, supported not just by a majority of Americans but by military brass and a majority of those in uniform? Pass New Start with enough votes to overcome a Republican filibuster? Pass bank and auto bailouts, which were actually quite centrist (and "Gergian") in their application? Etc., etc.

Oh, but all this somehow justifies a citizens' revolt of right-wing extremism? And somehow legitimizes acts of violence?

Democrats and those on the left generally certainly deserve some share of the blame for all the incendiary and violent political rhetoric that pollutes American political discourse -- Olbermann made that case himself -- but there's no way there's an even balance, or even anything close to it, between left and right.

And if you really think the Democrats are to blame, even indirectly, for what happened in Arizona on Saturday, you're a fucking idiot without a shred of credibility, no matter how much an enabling media establishment might prop you up.

The question John King didn't ask

By J. Thomas Duffy

The blogosphere was all aflame yesterday with the big interview by CNN's John King with the former shadow president, VP Dick Cheney (go to Memeoradum, now, or earlier today).



Cheney dissed President Obama, stuck to the script on his disastrous record, and pissed-and-moaned about how Scooter Libby is innocent and a really great guy.

Most of the posts (we'll have a cavalcade of them below) were, of course, slapping Cheney upside-the-head, as he included, in defending the financial meltdown of the country, stating with a "so" attitude, the Rumsfeldian gem of "stuff happens."

There was one exception, naturally, from the Politico's Mike Allen, who achieved the remarkable feat of licking Cheney's boots from miles away, with not one, but two posts on it.

But, since CNN reminds us, about every five seconds, that they have "the best political team on television," how is that King, without his customary magic board, blew it, missed the BIG GET, and did not ask the former shadow president about the death squads he was (and maybe still is) running?

I mean, that dropped on us this past week (mixed in with other torture news of The Bush Grindhouse) with, despite the evil we already know about, the mushroom cloud The Commander Guy's keeper used to gush about all the time.

Storied journalist says Cheney oversaw "executive assassination ring"

Cheney’s Assassination Squads

Hersh: 'Executive assassination ring' reported directly to Cheney

Robert Stein at Connecting The Dots posited:

Until now, President Obama has been discouraging retrospective investigations of Bush lawbreaking by Sen. Patrick Leahy, but Hersh has opened an ugly can of worms that can't be resealed.

Stopping the operation of American death squads, as the Commander-in-Chief has just apparently done, is one thing. But now that news about them has been made public by the most respected investigative reporter of our time, it's unthinkable that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney will not be called to answer for possible war crimes.

It is very likely, had King asked the question, that Cheney would have huffed it off as "garbage," but if King didn't cower (I suppose, he did have to think about, like, if his car brakes would work on the way home, or whether his house would have an "accidental" gas leak and blow up), it would have been fascinating to hear what Cheney would have said.

Would he have gone off on a tangent about how he and the other cronies had the task to keep us safe, and about how you don't do that by playing tiddlywinks?

King could have gotten, for the record, the first public response to the question of whether a sitting vice president was running death squads.

How could he have let that one go by?

There he was, the glob of molten evil, sitting right in front of him, and he babbles on about Cheney having a BlackBerry, and about Cheney driving himself around now, bemoaning how he doesn't get his cooked intelligence reports anymore (over-easy, sunny-lies up).

I am fairly certain that the "best political team on television" would have asked the question.

I guess we'll have to wait for the war crimes trial to get the dirt.

**********

Bonus Darth Vader Speaks! Riffs

CNN Video: Cheney says Obama's policies 'raise the risk' of U.S. terror attack

Faiz Shakir: Cheney’s Excuse For Economic Failures Under His Watch: ‘Stuff Happens’

Jon Perr: Cheney's "Stuff Happens" Defense of Republican Failure

DownWithTyranny: The Cheney Quartet For The Future Of The GOP: Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, Rob Portman & Mark Sanford

Ron Chusid: Dick Cheney Still Does Not Understand How To Prevent Terrorist Attacks

Matthew Yglesias: The Cheney Factor

Taylor Marsh: Dick Cheney Ignores that 9/11 Happened on Their Watch

MediaMatters: John King cites Human Events headline, asks Cheney, "Is the president of the United States trying to brazenly deceive the American people?"




(Cross-posted at The Garlic.)