Helen & Harry Highwater's cranky weblog of news and opinion.
|
"News that's not known, or not known enough." Helen & Harry Highwater's cranky weblog of news and opinion. |
|
| 
|
|
|
Los Angeles Times memo orders reporters to fudge the truth by Helen & Harry Highwater, Iraq has been invaded, occupied, and lots of Iraqis don't like it. They're fighting back. They're resistance fighters, but the Los Angeles Times has ordered its reporters not to
Clearly, Iraqis fighting Americans are the resistance, "an underground organization of a conquered or nearly conquered country engaging in sabotage and secret operations against occupation forces and collaborators." Insurgents, according to Merriam-Webster, are people who revolt "against civil authority or an established government." So whether they're "insurgents" or not depends on whether you think Americans are the "established government" or "civil authorities" in Iraq. I'll wager these Iraqis don't think so. The truth hurts sometimes, and if the Times tells too much truth they might lose some readers and panty hose ads. But burying your loved ones hurts even more than telling the truth. If we want Americans (and Iraqis) to stop burying their loved ones quite so quickly, it's time to face reality. The Times can issue a stack of memos a mile high, but memos won't change the truth. L.A. Times bans 'resistance fighters' by Dan Whitcomb , The Los Angeles Times has ordered its reporters to stop describing anti-American forces in Iraq as "resistance fighters," saying the term romanticizes them and evokes World War II-era heroism. The ban was issued by Melissa McCoy, a Times assistant managing editor, who told the staff in an e-mail circulated on Monday night that the phrase conveyed unintended meaning and asked them to instead use the terms "insurgents" or "guerrillas." McCoy told Reuters in an interview on Wednesday that the memo followed a discussion among top editors at the paper and was not sparked by reader complaints. The memo first surfaced on the Web site L.A. Observed. "(Times Managing Editor) Dean Baquet and I both individually had the same reaction when we saw the term used in the newspaper," McCoy said. "Both of us felt the phrase evoked a certain feeling, that there was a certain romanticism or heroism to the resistance." McCoy said she considered "resistance fighters" an accurate description of Iraqis battling American troops, but it also evoked World War II — specifically the French Resistance or Jews who fought against Nazis in the Warsaw ghetto. "Really, it was something that just stopped us when we saw it, and it was really about the way most Americans have come to view the words," McCoy said. McCoy said she was confident that the Times reporters who used the term had no intention of romanticizing the Iraqis who have killed more than 100 U.S. soldiers since Washington declared major combat over in May, and that the paper's Baghdad bureau had no objection to the policy change. The policy change reflects the highly politicized atmosphere surrounding the war in Iraq, which has brought charges of biased reporting from all sides of the political spectrum. McCoy said she did not know how many readers had made complaints about the use of the term. "We are loath to proscribe the use of just about any word," she said. "But sometimes certain combinations of words send an unintended signal. You combine these two seemingly innocuous words and suddenly they have this unintended meaning." Allan Siegal, assistant managing editor of the New York Times, told Reuters that he agreed with the decision made by his West Coast rivals. "We don't have a policy but when you mentioned the phrase it sounded like romanticizing to me," Siegal said. "I don't think it's the kind of cool, neutral language we like to see." But David Hoffman, foreign editor of the Washington Post, said his paper had used the phrase "resistance fighters" to describe Iraqi forces and had no objection to the term. "They are resisting an American occupation so it's not inaccurate," Hoffman said. "We try to be as precise as possible and distinguish whether they are former Ba'ath party, Fedayeen, outsiders, insiders. But that's not always possible." According to a search of the Lexis-Nexis database, The Los Angeles Times has employed the term "resistance fighters" dozens of times in the past six months, including three references on Monday. On Tuesday, the day after McCoy issued her memo, the paper used it in an editorial, which criticized the Bush administration for a lack of humility and candor over Iraq. Reuters News Agency
| Big howdy | Disclaimer for dummies | Our privacy policies |
|
|
