Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

FAIR alert: 'Swift Boat Smears'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-04 03:56 PM
Original message
FAIR alert: 'Swift Boat Smears'
(mods: I'm under the impression that FAIR media advisories are allowed to be posted in full, if there is a problem I'll edit)


Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
Media analysis, critiques and activism

http://www.fair.org/press-releases/swift-boat.html

MEDIA ADVISORY:
Swift Boat Smears:
Press Corps Keeps Anti-Kerry Distortions Alive

August 30, 2004

A group of Vietnam veterans called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth have
managed to dominate campaign coverage recently with a series of inaccurate
and unfounded allegations about John Kerry's Vietnam War service. But
instead of debunking the group's TV ads and numerous media appearances,
the press corps has devoted hours of broadcast time and considerable print
attention to the group's message.

At times, some reporters seem to suggest that the Swift Boat coverage is
being driven by some external force that they cannot control. "The ad war,
at least over John Kerry's service in Vietnam, has for the moment
effectively blocked out everything else," explained MSNBC's David Shuster
(8/23/04)-- as if the media are not the ones responsible for deciding
which issues were being "blocked out."

The New York Times similarly noted (8/20/04) that the group "catapulted
itself to the forefront of the presidential campaign," while Fox News
reporter Carl Cameron (8/23/04) suggested that "the controversy has
completely knocked Kerry off message, and the political impasse suggests
the story is not going away any time soon."

That "impasse" is largely the result of the media's failure to
sufficiently compare the Swift Boat charges to the available military
records and eyewitness accounts. Even a cursory examination of the
available evidence reveals fatal flaws in the group's charges, which fly
in the face of all documentary evidence, and the testimony of almost every
person present when Kerry earned his medals.

Larry Thurlow, the Swift Boat Vet who claims that Kerry was not under
enemy fire when he earned his Bronze Star, himself earned a Bronze Star
for actions under enemy fire in the same incident. Louis Letson, who
claims to have treated the wound that earned Kerry his first Purple Heart,
is not the medic listed in medical records as having treated Kerry. John
O'Neill, the leader of the group, has said that Kerry would have been
"court-martialed" had he crossed the border into Cambodia-- but O'Neill is
on tape telling President Richard Nixon that he himself had been in
Cambodia. Several members of the group are on the record praising Kerry's
leadership. And so on.

Imagine that the situation were reversed: What if all available
documentary records showed that George W. Bush had completed his stint in
the Air National Guard with flying colors? What if virtually every member
of his unit said he had been there the whole time, and had done a great
job? Suppose a group of fiercely partisan Democrats who had served in the
Guard at the same time came forward to say that the documents and the
first-hand testimony were wrong, and that Bush really hadn't been present
for his Guard service. Would members of the press really have a hard time
figuring out who was telling the truth in this situation? And how much
coverage would they give to the Democrats' easily discredited charges?

But when Kerry is the target of the attacks, many journalists seem content
to monitor the flow of charges and counter-charges, passing no judgment on
the merits of the accusations but merely reporting how they seem to affect
the tone of the campaign. As the Associated Press put it (8/24/04), Kerry
"has been struggling in recent days against charges-- denounced by
Democrats as smear tactics -- that he lied about his actions in Vietnam
that won five military medals." Credible charges or smears? AP's readers
could only use their own personal opinions of Democrats to judge.

To CNN, even the awarding of the medals became a matter of debate:
"They're not just attacking the medals that John Kerry might have won,"
reporter Daryn Kagan said of the Swift Boat Vets (8/24/04).

The notion that reporters cannot pass some reasonable judgment about the
ads was common. "There is no way that journalism can satisfy those who
think that Kerry is a liar or that Swift Boat Veterans For Truth are
liars," asserted NPR senior Washington editor Ron Elving (NPR.org,
8/25/04).

When asked if the Swift Boat ads, along with other ads critical of Bush,
were accurate, CNN's Bill Schneider (8/24/04) demurred: "I don't have an
answer because I haven't systematically looked at all those ads.
Certainly, the Swift Boat Veterans' ads-- that first ad has been looked at
with great care. And what the Washington Post concluded on Sunday was
those allegations have remained unproved." At this point, the 60-second ad
had been a major political controversy for weeks-- and CNN's senior
political analyst couldn't find the time to figure out whether it was
accurate or not?

An editorial in the L.A. Times (8/24/04) noted that the problem is not
that reporters can't say whether the charges are true-- it's that they
don't want to say: "The canons of the profession prevent most journalists
from saying outright: These charges are false. As a result, the voters are
left with a general sense that there is some controversy over...Kerry's
service in Vietnam."

One suspects that the "canons of the profession" would be interpreted
differently if, for example, Republican Sen. John McCain was the target of
similarly unsubstantiated charges about his military service from a
partisan Democratic group.

And the editorial went on to fall prey to another journalistic
convention-- finding blame on both sides, even when only one side is at
fault-- when it equated the Swift Boat Vets with "MoveOn.org, which is
running nasty ads about Bush's avoidance of service in Vietnam."

Just as the Swift Boat Vets are "funded by conservative groups that
interlock with Bush's world in various ways," the L.A. Times said MoveOn
is "part of Kerry's general milieu," and "either man could shut down the
groups working on his behalf if he wanted to." The only difference that
the editorial acknowledged is that while the MoveOn campaign is ''nasty
and personal,'' the Swift Boat Vets ads are ''nasty, personal and false.''


Never mind that MoveOn is a grassroots organization with 2 million
members, founded in 1998 when Kerry was merely the junior senator from
Massachusetts, while the Swift Boat Vets have no more independent
existence than the ''Republicans for Clean Air,'' which attacked McCain in
the 2000 primaries and then disappeared.

But to many journalists, finding some way to criticize both sides is much
easier-- and politically safer-- than examining evidence to try to
determine the truth. CNN's Candy Crowley (8/6/04), for example, said to
Kerry political director Steve Elmendorf: "There have been ads out there
that have compared the president to Hitler, that have been really, really
tough ads." That comparison makes little sense, though; the Hitler "ads"
were submissions by individuals to MoveOn's ad contest, and were removed
from the group's website when they were discovered.

Another way of drawing a false equivalence is by talking about the
"negativity" of both sides. CNN's John Mercurio (CNN.com, 8/20/04) wrote
that Kerry's comments responding to the Swift Boat charges "were
notable--if only because they revealed how negative, and how responsive,
both campaigns have become this year." One would think, rather, that they
showed how negative one campaign was and how responsive the other was.

Jim Rutenberg and Kate Zernike of the New York Times wrote a similar
article (8/22/04), lamenting that while "this was supposed to be the
positive campaign," both sides have discovered that "negative ads work."
As evidence, the reporters noted that "Bush has spent the majority of the
more than $100 million he has spent on television advertisements attacking
his Democratic opponent."

This is presumably a reference to a Washington Post survey (5/31/04) that
found that 75 percent of Bush's ads were negative. Not mentioned, however,
was the Post's finding in the same story that Kerry's ads were only 27
percent negative.

Including that fact would have spoiled the premise of the article, that
the sin of negativity is committed equally by both sides. But sometimes
the truth is not somewhere in the middle.


FAIR
(212) 633-6700
http://www.fair.org/
E-mail: fair@fair.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
buycitgo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-04 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. THANK you for that
Edited on Mon Aug-30-04 04:14 PM by buycitgo
What else needs to be added to that?

just about says it all

speaking of which.....

I called WGN radio last night; they had John Dickerson on--the TIME reporter who asked dumbo if he could think of any mistakes that he'd ever made in office

He also interviewed him for the current issue.

he was nauseatingly smitten by Bush, talking about how he BELIEVES everything he says, is a STRONG, DECISIVE leader, who never goes back once a decision is made, how he's positive about all the decisions he's made, including the "catastrophic success" in Iraq.

I started out by saying that listening to all this was like going through the Looking Glass, that reporters at his level were clearly playing the Emperor Has No Clothes Game, that EVERY decision he's made has been WRONG, from the 200 BILLION we've wasted on Iraq, to the disastrous tax cuts, to his environmental records, to the one point six BILLION Muslim enemeies we've made.....enemies that will be there virtually forEVER. I said he doesn't know the difference between the truth and lies, and that the media is NOT doing its job in helping the average news consumer determine the difference. I said a few other things, but can't remember now.

the next caller said I was a "Michael Moore Storm Trooper!"

he was from Lake Forest, one of the VERY wealthy North Shore suburbs of Chicago, btw. what a surprise
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-30-04 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. LOL -guess that is a compliment..
a "Michael Moore Storm Trooper!"


>EVERY decision he's made has been WRONG

..that is the really heart of it, 'wrong' for the people of this country and the world.
But from a strictly criminal point of view, the decisions are 'right', plenty of war profiteering, polluting etc.
Of course Bush is not campaigning from an Enron jet this time around, he's got AF-1.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 07:25 AM
Response to Original message
3. ~kICk~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dennis4868 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
4. Wow.....
a great read....it sums this whole mess up....THE FUCKING MEDIA SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES.....Kerry is getting Al Gored!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nagbacalan Donating Member (93 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. This parity shit must stop. Demonstrable falsehoods must be
aggressively exposed. Make no mistake about it, this issue evokes a visceral reaction in grassroots America. It goes to the core of character and is far more important than the "real" issues to the outcome of the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stone_Spirits Donating Member (586 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. FAIR does a fine job with this
once again FAIR is on top of the media coverage
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
6. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Darby Donating Member (484 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
7. Fax an Ethics Complaint on O'Neill to the Texas Bar TODAY
AND WRITE LETTERS TO THE EDITOR OF TEXAS NEWSPAPERS ON THIS TOPIC


Stop John O'Neill and force accountability upon him - this is how...
John E. O'Neill
CLEMENTS O'NEILL PIERCE WILSON ET AL
1000 LOUISIANA ST STE 1800
HOUSTON, TX, 77002
phone (713) 654-7604

Bar Card Number: 1529750

John E. O'Neill, author of Unfit for Command, is an attorney licensed and practicing in Texas. Rumor has it he thinks he will be appointed a federal judge...

According to the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct:

Rule 8.02 Judicial and Legal Officials (a) A lawyer shall not make a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the *qualifications or integrity* of a judge, adjudicatory official or public legal officer, or of a *candidate for election* or appointment to judicial or legal office.

Rule 8.04 Misconduct (a) A lawyer shall not: (3) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation;

The State Bar can sanction him, suspend his license or even DISBAR him.

PLEASE WRITE, FAX, FED EX THE TEXAS STATE BAR TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THESE VIOLATIONS - including at least one specific example of an obvious lie:

P.O. Box 12487
Austin, Texas 78711

1414 Colorado St.
Austin, TX 78701

Fax: (512)463-1475 <----------------------------

Telephone Numbers --- but writing is better

Toll Free: (800)204-2222
Local: (512)463-1463

COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF O'NEILL'S DEBUNKED LIES AT www.mediamatters.org - search on "O'NEILL"

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Excellent
thanks for the heads up.
I will write.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jonnyblitz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-01-04 06:49 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. welcome do DU Darby!
:thumbsup: :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-01-04 06:41 AM
Response to Original message
10. ~kICk~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 02:11 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC