IP: Journalism's Moral Responsibility: Three Questions

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

By Cole C. Campbell

Who's at fault for America's lack of preparedness that allowed terrorists 
to attack our people and our prosperity?

The first to feel the heat on Sept. 11, as broadcast anchors ruminated 
between horrible images of destruction, were the minimum-wage workers who 
run airport metal detectors and scanners. We can be certain these workers, 
as a class, will lose their jobs. Then fingers pointed to intelligence 
agencies. Outsiders accused intelligence operatives of ineptitude. 
Operatives accused outsiders of starving them of resources needed to do the 
job. We can be certain some heads will roll, payrolls will swell, and 
regulations barring double agents with dirty hands will be dropped.


Now a dust of blame, like debris from the collapsing towers, has landed on 
journalism. Will it stick? If so, can we be certain that any consequences 
will follow? How will those of us in the journalism community think and 
talk about these matters? Will we reflect in a meaningful way? Will we 
engage in selective denial or selective self-flagellation? Will we 
reallocate responsibility onto parties outside the profession?

Reading Jim Romenesko's MediaNews the outlines of the conversation are 
already emerging. It's evident in several recent postings, beginning with 
Geneva Overholser's lucid summary of the basic indictment.

Many have asked, "How could our intelligence services have failed us so?" 
But I would ask: How could our reporting on intelligence have been so poor? 
' In February, CIA Director George Tenet told the Senate Intelligence 
Committee that Osama bin Laden's "global network" was the "most immediate 
and serious" terrorist threat to the United States. A handful of newspapers 
covered the testimony, and even their stories were brief and buried.

<snip>

http://63.208.24.134/Terrorism/cole2.htm



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/