Monday, June 26, 2006
Media - UK Times smears our marines
Who checks anything out before publishing?
I understand mistakes;
But, I don't understand how they seem to always be the kind that make America look bad to the rest of the world.
More and more, the media seems to want to create news, instead of just reporting it.
And corrections rarely lessen the original inaccurate impact...
I understand mistakes;
But, I don't understand how they seem to always be the kind that make America look bad to the rest of the world.
More and more, the media seems to want to create news, instead of just reporting it.
And corrections rarely lessen the original inaccurate impact...
Michelle Malkin has a lot about this story (and the updates) on her website. Here's a part of it:
"Thank you for your prompt response. I am aware of your work, which is why I urged readers to contact you. I am glad to hear that you have asked for removal and apology. Please let me know when either or both of those steps are taken and I will update my post immediately.
I wrote:
If you are left with the impression that the dead bodies on the ground were massacred by our Marines, that is exactly what the Times intends.
This is an accurate statement. If the Times did not intend for readers to associate the photograph with the Nov. 19 Haditha incident, why did your newspaper use the photo?
I hope the paper provides a full explanation for exactly how it came to characterize and caption an April 2005 AP photo of fishermen murdered by insurgents as "victims of al-Haditha" of the "Massacre Marines blinded by hate" on Nov. 19, 2005."
