New York Times reporter James Risen illustrates in his new book how the CIA ignored information that Iraq no longer had weapons of mass destruction, according to the Associated Press.

State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration describes secret operations of the Bush administration's war on terrorism. The major revelation in the book, according to the AP, has already been the subject of SOME reporting by the New York Times: The so-called revelation that the National Security Agency eavesdropped on Americans' conversations without obtaining warrants from a special court - at the behest of President George W. Bush.

In October 2002, the U.S intelligence community issued a National Intelligence Estimate that concluded Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program, according to the book. Quoting extensively from anonymous sources, Risen says the NSA spying program was launched in 2002 after the CIA began to capture high-ranking al-Qaida operatives overseas and took their computers, cell phones and personal phone directories.

Full AP story

But the relevant story doesn't stop there.

Byron Calame, the New York Times public editor, a recruit from the conservative Wall Street Journal, wrote a column on Sunday taking issue with the stony silence on the issue by Times Executive Editor Bill Keller and Publisher Arthur "Punch" Sulzberger Jr.

"For the first time since I became public editor, the executive editor and the publisher have declined to respond to my requests for information about news-related decision-making," Calame wrote.

Behind the Eavesdropping Story, a Loud Silence

As we have reported here before, as a free-lance reporter for the New York Times national desk out of New Orleans in 2002, I personally tried to tell the New York Times their reporting leading up to the war in Iraq was on the wrong track. They listened to Judith Miller instead, and now the paper's reputation has suffered yet another blow.

One of the things I learned about journalism in the first of four communications programs I have participated in over the past 25 years is that a reputation for accuracy is very important. These days, critics on the right and the left are attacking the credibility of the press like never before.

Of course it seems to be a fact about the world we live in today that everyone is a critic - whether or not they have any qualifications or facts to back up their attacks.

But it seems to me that the managers of major newspapers especially should seek out experienced help on stories such as these rather than hiding behind their office walls in New York and attacking bloggers.

Someone will eventually unearth and publish the truth, whether it is on newsprint or book paper or a Weblog online.

But as George Orwell once said, "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."

The revolution has already begun . . . whether or not they like it or admit it in New York or Washington.

Posted by Glynn Wilson at 11:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

According to Robert W. McChesney, a media scholar and president of FreePress.Net, 2005 has been a remarkable year for the media reform movement.

"Together, we’ve proven to the politicians and industry moguls that people won’t stand idle while powerful interests make policies in our name but without our consent," he says.

He credits bloggers and activism for saving federal funding and thwarting partisan attacks on public broadcasting, for exposing fake news and "payola pundits," for helping to protect the right of local communities across the country to bring universal, affordable Internet access to their citizens.

FreePress.Net is now recruiting more Free Press e-activists.

Continue reading "The Only Way to Beat Big Media" »

Posted by Glynn Wilson at 12:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In a decision hailed by free-speech advocates, the Delaware Supreme Court on Wednesday reversed a lower court decision requiring an Internet service provider to disclose the identity of an anonymous blogger who targeted a local elected official, according to this report from the Associated Press.

In a 34-page opinion, the justices said a Superior Court judge should have required Smyrna town councilman Patrick Cahill to make a stronger case that he and his wife, Julia, had been defamed before ordering Comcast Cable Communications to disclose the identities of four anonymous posters to a blog site operated by Independent Newspapers Inc., publisher of the Delaware State News.

In a series of obscenity-laced tirades, the bloggers, among other things, pointed to Cahill's "obvious mental deterioration," and made several sexual references about him and his wife, including using the name "Gahill" to suggest that Cahill, who has publicly feuded with Smyrna Mayor Mark Schaeffer, is homosexual.

In June, the lower court judge ruled that the Cahills had established a "good faith basis" for contending that they were victims of defamation and affirmed a previous order for Comcast to disclose the bloggers' identities.

One of the bloggers, referred to in court papers only as John Doe No. 1 and his blog name, "Proud Citizen," challenged the ruling, arguing that the Cahills should have been required to establish a prima facie case of defamation before seeking disclosure of the defendants' identities.

The Supreme Court agreed, reversing and remanding the case to Superior Court with an order to dismiss the Cahills' claims.

Posted by Glynn Wilson at 04:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)