(Blog Post) If anyone ever tells you that they don't understand what is meant be "stenography journalism" -- or ever insists that America is plagued by a Liberal Media -- you can show them this article from today's Washington Post and, by itself, it should clear Full Story »
Posted by Beth Wellington - via Jay Rosen, Memeorandum, Digg, Glenn Greenwald
Greenwald provides background to criticize a story in the WaPo he sees as defending torture, when other sources, including the CIA Inspector General's report have indicated that torture was often counterproductive--moral issues aside. The WaPo story covered Monday's DOJ release of portions two documents that former Vice President Dick Cheney had claimed would prove the CIA's harsh interrogation tactics worked.Greenwald's conclusion is acid about "standard Post behavior." Actually the Post's behavior strikes me as uneven, rather than monolithic--a point he acknowledges in a way when he touts the Post's Greg Sargent's blog dissecting the CIA Inspector General's report. This seems common to be--look at the NYT breaking the NSA domestic spying stories, but only after sitting on them until after the election.spying). Greenwald does a good job, however, of documenting his criticism that the Post has presented opinion as fact. On Twitter, Jay Rosen advances the interesting hypothesis that "Greg Sargent's effectiveness prompted the Cheneyites to guilt the Post into today's piece." Greenwald added an update on why the Post's behavior so disturbs him--it can lead to the rise of a "blindly accepted 'fact'" that torture works.
“It would be one thing for Fred Hiatt to have printed this Post article as an Op-Ed from, say, John Bolton or some dutiful, low-level former Bush official. That’s just standard Post behavior. But to print this as a purported "news article” — and tout it as revealing “previously unpublicized details” — is, quite arguably, a new propagandistic low even for the Post, which is saying quite a bit.
As of today, thanks to the Post article, KSM’s torture-caused, life-saving disclosures will be every bit as much a blindly accepted “fact” in our political discourse as Saddam’s aluminum tubes were in 2003 — and both myths were disseminated by the same people and the same “journalistic” methods.
