Reuters and the UN are backing a news agency in Iraq:
“The development of a robust, independent and reliable media industry in Iraq is of fundamental importance to the world’s understanding of this nation and its people.
“This new agency, the first of its kind in Iraq’s history, will have a profound effect on how this country’s story is told.”
Geert Linnebank, the Reuters editor-in-chief
Having an independent Iraqi news service, with Iraqi reporters and editors: a great thing.
Having it led by Reuters, which is characteristically pro-insurgent and anti-West: not so great. Although the involvement by the UN, which is under a microscope and has taken strides toward supporting post-war development in Iraq could be good.
I hope.
Naah, they’ll go after al-Jazeera’s demographic, and probably try to outdo it. Personally, I’m surprised Murdoch hasn’t made a move.
So now Reuters is “pro insurgent”?
Amazing really. But I thought we weren’t supposed to call them “insurgents” anymore?
I agree, Davebo, it’s amazing to me too. But, there is a long and consistent history behind it.
Comment deleted by A.L….
NARAL just comment-spammed us with a comment completely unrelated to the post asking folks to oppose John Roberts.
I don’t like that (they’re obviously welcome to oppose their brains out, just be somewhat respectful of our comment threads).
A.L.
Joe, I get the impression from reading you over time that you feel the same way about any news organization that employs more than 3 writers, pays them, and covers well.. the news.
By the way, you do realize that Reuters also supports communism over capitalism right??
In fact it’s quite ironic.
Take a large group of people who for years have spent every spare moment complaining about the government.
Allow what they percieve to be “their side” to take control of all branches of government.
And what do they do?
Complain about the media because… wait for it…
They complain about the government.
Davebo, since we are playing rhetorical questions … you do realize that Joe has an extensive factual background for his opinion? The foundation of which is Reuters actual practices?
Robin,
Neither of my questions was in any way, nor can I see how anyone would classify them as “rhetorical”.
I truly expected an answer.
I have no doubt one could pull up all types of instances where they felt Reuters was “pro insurgency”.
Treasonous things like, say, reporting on attacks by insurgents.
Heck, we could rehash the story of the photo that either Time or Newsweek got because they were “tipped off by the insurgents that an attack was coming”.
But do you guys really want to make fools of yourselves on that one again?
I’d certainly hope not.
Davebo,
There have been several instances of outright coperation (not just co-location) between foreign reporters and terrorists in Iraq. Reuters is not the only agency so affected, they have been reported here and elsewhere, and you are urged to look them up. In several instances, the news organizations have been so exposed that they’ve had to apologize.
With respect to Reuters, however, the pattern is far deeper. It begins with refusing to call Osama bin Laden a terrorist, extends to a number of instances where language, captions, and edits convey their sympathies quite clearly (many of which are withdrawn without attribution once faced with the glare of publicity), as well as news practices. The gist is extremely clear: America is the Enemy. It’s not an uncommon gist in Europe, as blogs like Transatlantic Intelligencer and David’s Medienkritik point out regularly with their coverage.
In the unlikely even that you are actually interested in Reuters practices, as opposed to playing “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” Taranto’s “OpinionJournal.com Best of the Web” has a very long set of useful examples.
Joe
“There have been several instances of outright coperation (not just co-location) between foreign reporters and terrorists in Iraq.”
“Reuters is not the only agency so affected, they have been reported here and elsewhere, and you are urged to look them up.”
I believe I pointed out one such claim in my post.
If you have others that are perhaps slightly less ludicrous, I’d love to learn about them.
“In the unlikely even that you are actually interested in Reuters practices, as opposed to playing “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” Taranto’s “OpinionJournal.com Best of the Web” has a very long set of useful examples.”
So no I too am apparantly a hate america type?
It took an agonyingly long 45 seconds to find several instances of Reuters referring to Osama Bin Laden as the leader of the terrorist organization Al Qaida.
And I’m really not up to plowing through years worth of Taranto’s editorial blogs seeking out the “smoking gun” thanks.