NBC and MSNBC on Monday said they had terminated their relationship with Peter Arnett after the journalist told state-run Iraqi TV that the U.S.-led coalition’s initial war plan had failed and that reports from Baghdad about civilian casualties had helped antiwar protesters undermine the Bush administration’s strategy. NBC News President Neal Shapiro said in a statement.
Some others feel more strongly about his statement – that Arnett was literally helping the enemy.
I keep hearing a nice phrase; ‘No war plan survives the first encouter with the enemy’ - that’s conventional and accepted wisdom within the UK military (at least). And we hear it every day, presumably that’s shown on one of the three 24/7 Arabic language news stations, as well. Not exactly ‘hold the front page’ material.
Just means you have to adjust once it all kicks off because you can’t plan, predict (wargame) and deploy for every eventuality. So, of course, what he said is right, he just seems to have left it hang in the air rather than qualify it.
Anyway, I seriously doubt this is about what Neal Shapiro thinks and rather more about the administration threatening to run NBC’s balls through the mincer (‘access denied’). In other words, ‘control’
Someone on talk radio this morning made an interesting point.
A couple of the journalists expelled from Iraq are still among the missing. Mr. Arnett did not see fit to mention this during his interview.
I don’t think it is under dispute that the Iraqis allowed Mr. Arnett to remain behind because they expect him to say things that they can use, and at least not to raise any embarassing questions about human shields, conscripts being forced into tanks to attack the allied forces at gunpoint, civilian families being forced to carry weapons thru check points, fraudulent surrenders, etc., etc.
I found his characterization of the Iraqi system of torture and murder of their citizens as a “government’s requirements of discipline” to be somewhat beyond naive.
The line between reporter and Iraqi apologist is not a fine one, and I think he has stepped well over it. Now he can trot off and write a scathing book about how he was silenced by the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. Or get a job writing copy for the Saddam Hussein Baby Food Company (“The Scud Missile of Baby Foods - Buy it, or the kid gets it!”).
I think the issue is why an American national was speaking to the Iraqi press when our forces are engaged in battle with the Iraqis. The war has only been going on for two weeks now. I think anyone is jumping the gun to predict the results this soon. And as far as the war protestors go, they don’t need any more reasons to bitch. It was poor judgement on his part.
NBC/MSNBC/National Geographic did not have a great deal of choice. Their credibility was at stake in retaining a correspondent who could not resist emphasizing his role as an Administration opponent on state-run Iraqi TV in wartime (“Your strategy’s working great, fellas!”).
Mr. Arnett is now free to express his views as a citizen, as a “reporter” for less selective news organizations, or in a searing new book (I suspect the desire to create controversy in advance of such a book may have been among his motivations).
I had not heard that NBC was “threatened” by the Bush Administration if they did not fire Arnett. No doubt a cite will be forthcoming to back up this claim.
That may be so, but him saying it is of propaganda significance. This is not al-Jazeera - a different but legitimate voice - this is giving an interview to be directly used for propaganda purposes by the Iraqi government. If the story is as december says it is, it’s an amazing lapse.
But its not really, true, you know. Arnett was practically sayng that Saddam had already won and in a few more days the US would run away. Which will not happen. Moreover, he may well have just increased the number of Iraqis and US servicemen who will die, just to get a story. The US plan has worked beautifully, resulting in defeat after defeat for Saddam, and the slow elimination of his loyal forces in exchanbge for minor casualties. The press tends to treat any US death as a huge failure, regardless of source. This isn’t Arnett’s frst act of near-treason, either.
Truly, the contents of his comments were no news and he compromised no sensitive information, as any satellite dish in Iraq has picked up that and more over the past few days. Cries of “giving comfort to the enemy” every time anyone says something unflattering are a bit exaggerated.
However, if you are asigned as a “reporter” to the scene of the action (as opposed to a commentator/analyst/critic*), it should be IMO an ethical policy to NOT become yourself the subject of policy-issue interviews. It’s also probably company policy – reasonably so – that its stringers should not themselves become sources for another media outlet while on assignment, w/o clearing it with the home office. It may be OK to be in a “let’s look at a day in the life of the foreign press” report, where you gripe about the hotel food and say nice things about the Iraqi common people and show off your newest gear, but you really should say “no thanks” when asked to coment on issues, even if everyone knows the answer.
OTOH, Arnett has been in that grey area of “reporter-commentator-celebrity” where it’s damned hard to nail down what are the limits of his activities (sort of like a Geraldo Rivera vibe). He is a very good on-the-ground man, but he went outside what NBC wanted, and he has a history of that. NBC are within their rights to terminate his contract BUT should have been aware what they were getting into by putting Arnett in Baghdad.
(* Let’s say, for instance, we had Michael Moore and Ann Coulter in Baghdad [I know, I know, I too would pay money to see that]: They are not “reporters”, but celeb commentator/critics with known advocacies, so IMO they would be fair game for being interviewed and spouting opinions that tick off people in the home front.)
Me, too. That was my reaction: “Wow, that was stupid. Really, really stupid.” Talk about taking a gun, pointing it at your career, and pulling the trigger. I mean, what did he think was going to happen? That all the NBC Suits would call each other up and say happily, “Hey, guys, guess what? Tune in Iraq Channel X! Peter’s on TV!”
As for whether firing him was the “right” thing for his bosses to do, as in “proper”, well, you can wave the “journalists have free speech, too” flag all you like, but the fact remains that it was a really stupid thing for him to do, so in that respect–in the respect that NBC probly doesn’t need any more Stupids working for them–yeah, they made the right decision.
To clarify: Arnett was ostensibly not “put in Baghdad” by NBC to cover the war, but was already in Iraq on an assignment for a National Geographic show on MSNBC, and just happened to be convenient to the front when things began getting interesting. Still NBC knew well what they were getting into by putting him in the high-visibility spot.
I guess this serves as notice that objective reporting on this war will not be tolerated. All reporters are required to break their arms waving Old Glory/ the Union Jack, and they can never, under any circumstances, report that we are having any problems with our slimy little invasion.
As for telling the truth to Iraqi TV, so what? Reporters are not supposed to take sides. They asked a question he gave them the answer. he didn’t tell them anything they didn’t already know.
It’s not Arnett’s fault that the invasion is failing, blame the incompetence of Rumsfeld and Bush.
I doubt very much if this will have any negative effect on his career. A couple of us have already mentioned the no doubt forthcoming book, “Truth and Bullets: How I Single-Handedly Stood Up to the Corporate Monolith and Fascist Bush Adminstrations And Told Them The Truth They Didn’t Want to Hear, Showing How Brave and Honest I Am and How Stupid They Are” which will be favorably reviewed by all the usual suspects. Plus he can always get a gig for the anti-Administration spinmeister slot on the Sunday morning talk shows for as long as the Iraqi war lasts.
Michael Moore claims he is more in demand now than before his speech at the Oscars. Same will happen for Arnett.
You mean we haven’t really “paused” in our move to Baghdad. Was that pause expected or planned? There has* been a delay, I don’t see how you can deny that.
Yeah, but Shodan, you gotta admit that his career as a standup reporter on a war front is over. Granted, he can always write a book and go on the lecture circuit, and he won’t be on unemployment or flippin’ burgers at McD’s, but still…
So it sounds to me like he got off-topic (“make nice to them about journalists”), got carried away, and started talking about the war.
What he actually said, if anybody’s interested, from the MSNBC link.
Dumb. Just dumb.
Diogenes, it’s not a question of “what did he say that wasn’t true”. It’s a question of effrontery, of chutzpah. He’s just a friggin’ reporter, fa cryin out loud, not a spokesperson for the military. It’s not his job to pontificate to one side in a war about the other side’s possible strategy.
Picture this–it’s Vietnam, 1970, and Peter Arnett is being interviewed by North Vietnamese TV, and during the interview he shoots off his mouth about U.S. strategy, and mentions how unpopular the war is becoming back home. Fire him? I say, “Yep.”
His Iraqi interview amounts to saying to the Iraqis, “Hang in there long enough, guys, and public opinion in the U.S. will make Bush call off the dogs.” I’m amazed that he didn’t bring up Vietnam.
Diogenes the Cynic, whatever you think of appropriateness of the invasion, it is hard to disagree with the notion that the Iraqi press is simply the propaganda arm of the Iraqi government. Giving the assessment he did to the Iraqi press was taking sides. It was unfathomably stupid.
I have been quite impressed the discretion of the embedded reporters with regard to operational security. However, CNN just reported that Geraldo who is (was) a FOX embed is now being escorted by the military out of Iraq. Apparently he asked his cameraman to focus on the sand where Geraldo proceded to draw a map in the sand showing his units’ location. :mad: