Posted by M. Wright | Filed in: Uncategorized
The following phone call took place about 10 minutes ago. This is a rough transcript, as the call was not recorded:
Ring. Ring.
CNN: Hello? CNN.
Me: Yes, may I have office of Jonathan Klein, please?
CNN: Who are you?
Me: This is Mick Wright.
CNN: Who are you?
Me: My name is Mick Wright.
CNN: No, who are you with?
Me: I’m not with anybody.
CNN: You’re just calling the President of CNN?
Me: That’s right.
CNN: What is this concerning?
Me: It’s concerning some news coverage.
CNN: Ok… I can take a message. What’s your phone number?
Me: 901.—.—-
CNN: Ok, and what is this concerning specifically?
Me: The lack of news coverage on a particular story.
CNN: What story is that?
Me: The 500 chemical shells found in Iraq.
CNN: Oh, I see, ok, thank you. [About to hang up]
Me: Let me ask you a question.
CNN: Ok.
Me: Have you heard about the 500 chemical shells we found in Iraq?
CNN: Yes, I saw it on Fox News.
Me: Why isn’t CNN covering this story?
CNN: Well, I believe the Department of Defense said today that..
Me: How would you know that? How would anyone know that unless you report it?
CNN: We’ve got many correspondants in Iraq and a big staff and I’m sure we’re tracking this story. There are reports on our network and on other networks…
Me: No, CNN has not reported this story. Fox News, yes.
CNN: Ok, I’ll give him your message.
Me: Thank you.
CNN: Goodbye.
After this, I take a restroom break, and when I come back I have a voicemail on my phone:
CNN: Hi, I just spoke to you, I’m with CNN. I just wanted to give you the best way to send any information or any complaints or concerns about things that we may or may not be covering is to go to public.information@cnn.com. All of those are read and responded to and sent to the right people, so that’s your best bet. Thanks. Bye.
Yeah, thanks CNN, but I already tried that. Two days ago.
Somehow the fact that we’ve found stockpiles of WMD in Iraq is not important enough to cover in a two-day span. Stories that are more important include:
- Man who de-lints his cat wins clean award
- McPhee one of millions with bulimia
- Springsteen talks about his album’s message
Etc.
UPDATE: Fifty percent of Americans now know the facts, despite the media’s misinformation campaign:
Half of Americans now say Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the United States invaded the country in 2003 — up from 36 percent last year, a Harris poll finds. Pollsters deemed the increase both “substantial” and “surprising” in light of persistent press reports to the contrary in recent years.
The survey did not speculate on what caused the shift in opinion, which supports President Bush’s original rationale for going to war. Respondents were questioned in early July after the release of a Defense Department intelligence report that revealed coalition forces recovered 500 aging chemical weapons containing mustard or sarin gas nerve agents in Iraq.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:14 pm
I noticed yesterday that no other news agency reported anything about the WMD’s on their websites- only Fox News. Yet they do report about Saddam’s half day hunger strike. There’s definitely no bias in the media.
June 23rd, 2006 at 1:59 pm
This is pretty funny, but probably not in the way you intended. Interesting that you cut him off as he was about to mention the part where the DoD categorically disavowed Santorum’s bizarre grandstanding..
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:00 pm
“CNN: Well, I believe the Department of Defense said today that..”
So, what was reported by the Department of Defense?
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:04 pm
Chris - You wouldn’t know what the DoD said if you were counting on CNN to report it.
Huck - Exactly my point.
Also, it was a she, not a he.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:05 pm
It’s a conspiracy. It must be.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:05 pm
It may be because it’s old news that fell down the grasping-at-straws crowd’s memory hole. It was dismised, debunked and discredited more than a year ago. That doesn’t mean that P.T. Barnum wasn’t right, though.
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:11 pm
Indeed, he was, JP. Indeed, he was.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:25 pm
The news is Wednesday’s release of a newly declassified military intelligence report which once again exposes Saddam Hussein’s WMD deception and disproves a favorite liberal talking point, which is why your grasping-at-straws liberal crowd so desperately needs to suppress it and has a friend in CNN’s incompetence and/or bias.
Now, you’re right it has been “dismised” [sic], by CNN. But given the timeliness of this story, only time-travelers could attempt what you claim, though it would be still impossible for these travelers to “debunk” and “discredit” news that two members of Congress held a press conference to discuss a newly declassified military intelligence report; that is an objective fact that we all agree happened… and that we all agree CNN has failed to report.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:38 pm
Did you ever think that CNN didn’t fail to report it, but instead chose not to report a nonsensical political stunt?
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:43 pm
Mick — It was dismissed, discredited and debunked by the original reporting agencies back in 2003 and 2004, and since also dismissed by DoD and the White House. But, whatever gets you through the night.
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:43 pm
Tell me, does the fact that 500 out of date and useless shells were found years after the invasion [hence were probably unknown to the US],justify the war in any way.Is this the extent of your reasoning and evidence?That,sir,is foolish and stupid!Would you,sir,risk your life for such crap?
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:51 pm
Huck - I suppose if you ignore all the story’s newsworthy elements of timeliness, prominence, impact, conflict, proximity and intrigue you have a decent point, but CNN is quite clearly not above printing that kind of vapid story either.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:54 pm
Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.
“This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991,” the official said, adding the munitions “are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war.”
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:55 pm
Nope. So it must have been even less important than their most vapid garbage.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:56 pm
NEWS FLASH: Soon-to-be-ex-Senator From Pennsylvania Fails To Boost Poll Numbers With Cheap Political Stunt
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 2:57 pm
JP - This story came from newly declassified information first reported on Wednesday, so your argument is void.
Jim - This post isn’t about the Coalition’s justification for military action. This post is about CNN’s justification for not reporting a newsworthy story we’re all familiar with and discussing at present.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:00 pm
JP - You’ll have a hard time making a case that this story has been “dismissed” and “debunked” by linking to more news coverage of it. And especially coverage by Fox News.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:02 pm
So CNN is not reliable and you admit Fox is not reliable… where do you get your news from again?
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:10 pm
Mick — Just pointing out that you seem to have ignored that the DoD response was also reported by Fox News, exactly as I c&p’d from the link I provided. However, if you want to believe shouting heads at Fox, and soon-to-be-ex-Senators from PA who keeps a stillborn fetus in a jar rather than the DoD — which, btw, has been very good at toeing the administration line — hey, you have at it.
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:13 pm
OK,CNN sucks……..big freakin’ deal.Does this justify the old chestnut of a liberal and biased media?Please! Is this all ya got,sport?Ya coulda been a contenda’!!!
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:16 pm
NEXT WEEK: Sen. Santorum (R-PA) announces a newly-declassified report about mobile
hydrogen-generation stations for weather balloonsbioweapons labs found in Iraq!.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:16 pm
the best response from cnn would’ve been something to the effect of:
“sir we didn’t run this story because we like to have some sort of factual merit behind things we report.”
followed very shortly by the sound of a dial tone.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:18 pm
NEXT WEEK: Sen. Santorum (R-PA) announces a newly-declassified report about mobile hydrogen-generation stations for weather balloons bioweapons labs found in Iraq!
Careful, JP. You’re liable to start a FOX NEWS story.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:23 pm
Mick, I love you. That’s the best, thanks for sharing the joy.
Huck, I love to get news from The Onion when I’m looking for unbiased reporting.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:29 pm
I think Fox News is biased for allowing the DoD to even respond to this obviously important political stunt.
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:32 pm
I agree, JP. FOX is so darned liberal.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:35 pm
Ok, JP, it’s just a political stunt that was debunked two years before it happened. We’re all discussing it, but it isn’t newsworthy. We gotcha. You can go back to nashvilleistalking.com now.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:35 pm
Alright. I’ve had my fun. Have a great weekend everyone, and remember, if you find any defunct shells out there, be sure to start a war. Oh wait, our government didn’t even need those to start invading. Ah well, happy killing anyway.
Huck Out.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:37 pm
Yeah, Huck — Fox is too fair, too balanced, I guess. The Pentagon may even need to re-think this policy in regards to Fox.
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:39 pm
Mick: Ok, JP, it’s just a political stunt that was debunked two years before it happened.
So, you don’t think that the DoD’s response within the very story, from the very source you tout (that I quoted above, and you seem to selectively missed reading), makes this a non-story?
Explain, please.
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:43 pm
JP - I guess it’s simply beyond my ability to explain to you how the article you linked to and quoted from is a newsworthy story.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:50 pm
Mick: JP - I guess it’s simply beyond my ability to explain to you how the article you linked to and quoted from is a newsworthy story.
Yeah, I guess it is, since the DoD response to this apparently newsworthy story, this very week, was (again, with emphasis added by me):
Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.
“This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991,” the official said, adding the munitions “are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war.”
Now, if there’s something in the newly-declassified report that Santorum was waving around on Wednesday that tells us something we didn’t already know from the 2+ years of easily-Googleable reporting on “found WMD in Iraq,” it should be easy enough for you to point those revelations out.
Allow me to speculate that you won’t. I hope I’m wrong, though, because clearly this is an important story — after all, you keep saying it is!
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 3:57 pm
Btw, MSNBC reported on this story; not just Fox.
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:20 pm
JP - Please pay attention, because this is the last time I’m going to explain it to you: this story, which you are quoting, is NEWSWORTHY. That’s why it’s news. That’s why you’re quoting it. That’s why Fox and MSNBC, as you say, are reporting it. Because the Story. Is. News. That’s my whole point — this is newsworthy (both the intial news conference, and the subsequent quotes by DoD and administration officials), and CNN has failed to report it. The fact that you keep quoting and linking to more news reports about it aids my point.
You’re trying to make a secondary argument about the quality and implications of the information that was declassified, and what it means politically, but that’s not the point of this post.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:25 pm
Mick — it’s as newsworthy as any other Senator saying that we found WMD that one would need a time machine to to make them, uh, actual WMD.
Also found in Iraq: Rusty milk pails!
Same difference.
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:30 pm
If Fox News reports something, it’s de facto “newsworthy”….? So if CNN reports something and Fox doesn’t, Fox is deliberately not covering a story worth covering?
Maybe CNN made its own independent determination that it wasn’t newsworthy. Because the “story” is about claims made by Santorum and Hoekstra. Perhaps CNN decided those two were full of it, because their claims weren’t supported by the evidence they were relying upon. An entirely reasonable determination, considering the shells referred to -were not usable-, and hence, not capable of causing “mass destruction.”
The only reason you’ve claimed that the story is “newsworthy” is because Fox News reported it. They also report on whether certain celebrities are pregnant, or breaking up with their girlfriends/boyfriends. If the WSJ fails to report on the state of Britney Spears’ marriage, is it incumbent upon the WSJ to explain why it’s keeping mum as well?
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:30 pm
It’s newsworthy because no one can point out any new information in this story that hasn’t been reported for 2+ years… BUT a well-known soon-to-be-ex-Senator said it!
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:33 pm
It’s not just a matter of a Senator saying something. This story deals with newly declassified information shedding new light on the ongoing WMD discoveries in Iraq. But even if that weren’t the case, I would still think it at least somewhat newsworthy for a Senator to make such a claim — judging from the interest seen in this very thread, it would be a very newsworthy story in either case. You continue to quibble about the implications of the intelligence and facts, but these are still the facts, and they’re still newsworthy… and, last I checked, CNN still hasn’t reported on this story, from any angle.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:38 pm
Mick: It’s not just a matter of a Senator saying something. This story deals with newly declassified information shedding new light on the ongoing WMD discoveries in Iraq.
What new light?
Name one single thing in this newly-declassified report that hasn’t been reported on in the previous 2+ years of reporting on this non-story about old, unusable WMD found in Iraq.
Just one new revelation, please. Thank you.
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:39 pm
NEWS: Ssomething notable happens.
NOT NEWS: Someone tries to pretend something notable happened (which in fact did happened, but is in fact, not notable), in failed attempt to create a controversy where none exists. Members of his own party collectively yawn, wonder “why do we have all the losers on our team?”
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:46 pm
If Fox News reports something, it’s de facto “newsworthy”….? The only reason you’ve claimed that the story is “newsworthy” is because Fox News reported it.
No, as I said above, the story is newsworthy when it contains newsworthy elements such as it does: timeliness, prominence, impact, conflict, proximity and intrigue, to name a few.
Because the “story” is about claims made by Santorum and Hoekstra. Perhaps CNN decided those two were full of it, because their claims weren’t supported by the evidence they were relying upon.
The crux of the story and the focus of the news conference was the information declassified and sent by Negroponte, not “claims” made by Congressmen (though that alone could also be newsworthy).
An entirely reasonable determination, considering the shells referred to -were not usable-, and hence, not capable of causing “mass destruction.”
You clearly didn’t read the NGIC intelligence report. Here it is. To quote part: “While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal.” We could also add to the mix the post-2003 chemical weapons factory we also found last year. So what happens if you add a new bullet to an old gun? And in any case, these are both violations of UN Resolution 1441 and others.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:49 pm
JP - Stockpiles of 500 and counting.
P Clark - “Someone tries to pretend something notable happened” - Even though that’s not the case here, such a thing could be quite newsworthy; ask any journalism professor.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:50 pm
“Potentially Hazardous And Lethal Chemicals Found Over Past Three Years” just doesn’t have the same ring to it as “OMFG! WMD!!!” in the headline-writing department, does it?
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:52 pm
Mick: Stockpiles of 500 and counting.
Oh, so the number of ineffective, unusable, old, deteriorating shells has gone up — now THAT’s NEWSY!
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:55 pm
NEWS FLASH: President Bush Caught With Stash Of Child Porn*
* actually a Victoria’s Secret catalog, but, all those women were ONCE children, and are fully disrobed on a daily basis
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 5:01 pm
You asked for “just one new revelation,” and I just gave it to you. You’re welcome.
And, yes, the number is newsworthy, because it dramatically increases the number of prohibited weapons hidden by Saddam Hussein. It’s also several times as many weapons as Hussein used to murder his own people. And it’s newsworthy because it’s a large stockpile of hidden weapons that we didn’t know existed until this week.
And it’s newsworthy because it’s a huge defeat for Bush-lied liberals such as yourself, which is why I believe CNN refuses to report it and why you’re spending hours blogging about it.
June 23rd, 2006 at 5:13 pm
Mick: You asked for “just one new revelation,” and I just gave it to you. You’re welcome.
Yes, you just told me that the longer our troops stay in Iraq, the more useless, former WMD will be found. I can’t believe what a revelation that is.
How about th stockpiles of HE known to be stored at al QaaQaa, but left unguarded, unsecured, and now all in the hands of insurgents? Isn’t that even more newsworthy, given that those explosives are being used every week in IEDs and car bombs? Y’know — that stuff is actually killing our troops, unlike these 500 rustbucket shells.
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 5:42 pm
Nice try Mick, but you’ll have a better chance of teaching a pig to sing then to convince the holier-than-thou liberals from NIT that this is a newsworthy story.
Kudos to the story though. I wondered if CNN had learned anything from the Eason Jordan fiasco. You have sufficiently answered my question.
June 23rd, 2006 at 5:42 pm
Mick, Olberman has been all over this story. When it turns up on the Daily Show then we will all know how newsworthy this really is!
June 23rd, 2006 at 6:10 pm
How many U.S. troops have been killed by these WMD, I wonder…
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 6:27 pm
Heavy rocks can also be used to kill people, and I have it on good authority that Iraq had a metric buttload of big rocks stockpiled before the war. True, some of them had been turned to gravel between 1991-2003, but there were still some sizeable rocks there. And we’ll probably find another rock tomorrow, in Iraq, somewhere (if they haven’t already been shipped to Syria, of course).
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 7:04 pm
We must not let the smoking gun come in the form of a huge, mushroom-shaped rock!
.
June 23rd, 2006 at 7:16 pm
JP, man, you’re doing yeoman’s work here, but I think you’d get better results by talking to the walls. These folks know what they know, and they’re not about to let facts get in the way. Personally, I wish CNN had reported it just as FOX did. That way, there would be that many more people who know that Santorum’s a way-down-in-the-polls lying psychopath who’s trying to score political points by hysterically foaming at the mouth and desperately peddling non-information that’s been debunked by the DoD for ages. As a poster on a diary I read today wrote: “Orange alert!! Orange alert!! The elections are coming!! The elections are coming!!”
Hilarious!!
June 24th, 2006 at 1:30 pm
A lively debate, but whether a valid find or not, the memo declassified only this week (not 2004) was released by a US Senator (that is news). It claimed WMD found (that is news). Others claim they are old and no good (that is news). Some complete idiots claim they were discredited in 2004 (although the information was not released until last week, and that is news). Any way you look at it, it was news. So I guess what this all means is, if you want the news watch FOX. If you want fluff, watch CNN.
June 24th, 2006 at 2:19 pm
John — You miss the point, again. Stories of “found WMD” which have always turned out to be old, decrepit, deteriorated, no-longer-WMD have indeed been reported on for over two years. Saying that these found, useless items are WMD is like saying someone is a child molester today because their spouse was a minor in 1988.
The only new information in Santorum’s stunt was that the number of these found, useless items has increased, and I think that’s been adequately lampooned as a noteworthy factoid, already.
.
June 25th, 2006 at 11:13 pm
How many of these shells did Blix’s crew find?
June 26th, 2006 at 3:59 pm
A.C. — Presumably none, but since they were no longer WMD, it hardly matters. Finding a few deteriorated, useless shells here and there was never a big deal, one way or the other.
Again, the more newsworthy question would be: How many tons of HE did U.N. inspectors report being under seal at al Qaa Qaa, and what was done to secure that? Is there any question that these explosives have killed and wounded hundreds, if not thousands of Americans and Iraqis, alike?
Can one say the same for these rusty shells? Even one death?
.
June 27th, 2006 at 11:04 pm
[...] You will notice I did not post the CNN headline above that Newscoma refers to. There is a reason for that, just ask Fishkite. [...]