Looking at the Curious Rules of American Journalism: PBS's NewsHour and the Role of Media in Time of War

Now don't get me wrong here. I'm a card-carrying member of WXXI and I tune in everyday to 1370am. But let's be honest, NPR and PBS could definitely do a better job of uncovering the truth. Or to put it another way, WXXI definitely needs Democracy Now! to round out its coverage of the news. In fact there have been a couple of instances on the NewsHour when host Jim Lehrer went out of his way to distort reality.

In a NewsHour interview in on suicide bombings in Iraq (March 2nd), Ray Suarez interviewed Christian Parenti, author of a book on occupied Iraq. After a nuanced discussion of the various factions and motivations of the Iraqi resistance Parenti and Suarez ended with this exchange:

But there are weapons caches all over the place. So that doesn't
necessarily indicate who the authors of the action are.

RAY SUAREZ: Does this, for the near term, Christian Parenti, make the American job harder on the ground in Iraq?

CHRISTIAN PARENTI: I would think so. I would think that we have to look at some of the deeper causes as to why there's so much frustration. Why are Iraqis so angry and willing to point the blame at the U.S. after this sort of bombing? A lot of it has to do with the failure of meaningful reconstruction. There still is not adequate electricity. In many towns like Ramadi there wasn't adequate water. Where is all the money that's going to Halliburton and Bechtel to rebuild this country? Where is it ending up? I think that is one of the most important fundamental causes of instability, is the corruption around the contracting with these Bush-connected firms in Iraq. Unless that is dealt with, there is going to be much more instability for times to come in Iraq.

RAY SUAREZ: Christian Parenti, Juan Cole, gentlemen, thank you both.

Apparently, after the broadcast, Jim Lehrer went ballistic and banned Parenti from reappearing on the NewsHour, saying that Parenti had
violated Lehrer's "rules of journalism about separat[ing] opinion and
analysis from straight news stories."

Huh? Parenti was being interviewed (meaning he was being asked his opinion and analysis) and his comments were based on his reporting and first hand observations. The NewsHour regularly interviews journalists who give their opinions. Lehrer went on the air the next day to apologize for "not being as balanced as is our standard practice."

But Lehrer was on a roll. The next month Lehrer "corrected" a guest about the U.S. closure of the Al-Sadr affilliated Al Hawza newspaper, explaining, "The reason we shut down his press is because it was calling for violence. I just want to get that on the record."

Yeah, well except that isn't true. That's what the Bush administration claimed. But it wasn't true. When syndicated media analyst Norman Solomon called the News hour and asked for substantiation of Lehrer's claim, a News Hour spokesperson offered news articles from the New York Times and Chicago Tribune.

But according to Solomon those articles don't say any such thing. In fact, according to another New York Times article "the [Al Hawza] paper did not print any calls for attacks." Lehrer initially refused to issue a correction but, according to the News Hour website, did eventually apologize for the comment.

Lehrer's actions seem to reveal an instinctive siding with authorities. While Lehrer aggressively invoked his personal journalistic credo against Parenti (albeit selectively) he was totally lax in challenging Rumsfeld in September 2002, when he claimed in an interview with Lehrer that Iraq "threw the [U.N.] inspectors out" in 1998, and that in 1990 Iraq had plans for "invading Saudi Arabia, which they were ready to do." Both assertions are false, and neither was challenged by Lehrer nor did he ever issue a correction.

But Lehrer's reporting on the war does not stand out for its lack of critical perspective. In the month leading up to the invasion of Iraq last year, a Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) study showed that of the 393 interviews conducted by PBS's News Hour, CBS, NBC and ABC only three were with people representing an anti-war perspective.

Lehrer's behavior and the FAIR study underscore the findings of a media study issued by the Center for International Security Studies at the University of Maryland. According to the study "the established principles of the American media make it easier for the incumbent President, whoever that might be, to dominate news coverage by setting the terms of public discussion. Journalistic standards that meant to ensure objectivity and guard against political bias had the effect of insulating the President from informed critical scrutiny."

In fact, as Amy Goodman has pointed out, the corporate media doesn't even agree with itself about what constitutes proper journalism. During the bombing of Iraq in March '03 CNN showed its American audience pictures of the aerial bombing. But for the European television audience, CNN showed a split screen showing both the bombing and the injured Iraqi's. What journalistic principle was CNN following there?

Excellent journalism requires a more critical perspective. Rochester needs Democracy Now!