{"id":8541,"date":"2006-09-22T15:32:20","date_gmt":"2006-09-22T19:32:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com\/archives\/8541.html"},"modified":"2006-09-22T15:32:20","modified_gmt":"2006-09-22T19:32:20","slug":"questions-the-press-should-ask","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/questions-the-press-should-ask\/","title":{"rendered":"&#8216;Questions the Press Should Ask&#8217;"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>In the wake of the &#8220;compromise&#8221; on torture between the White House and Senate Republicans, the media coverage has been a bit of a mixed bag. The <a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/content\/article\/2006\/09\/21\/AR2006092101647.html\">WaPo<\/a> and the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2006\/09\/22\/opinion\/22fri1.html?ex=1316577600&#038;en=8f8bcbbcb0b8b5dc&#038;ei=5090&#038;partner=rssuserland&#038;emc=rss\">NYT<\/a> ran helpful, illuminating op-eds that everyone should read, but a lot of the coverage has been, sadly, more about the politics than the policy. We&#8217;re getting a lot about who &#8220;won&#8221; the negotiations and how this will affect the midterm elections.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/content\/linkset\/2005\/04\/11\/LI2005041100879.html\">Dan Froomkin noted<\/a>, accurately, that part of the problem lies in the fact that political reporters had paid almost no attention to the story until the intra-party rift added drama to the question of whether we&#8217;ll continue to torture detainees. With the president having struck a deal with the Three Stooges, Froomkin predicts that &#8220;most reporters&#8217; tendencies will be to cover the issue mostly from the angle of its effectiveness as a political cudgel in the mid-term elections.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Froomkin makes a great case that it&#8217;s up to reporters to flesh out the details and offer the public &#8220;a full and open debate on this important moral issue.&#8221; In fact, he has a few suggestions of questions that need answers.<br \/>\n<!--more--><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Step one would be some actual reporting into the CIA interrogation program, including aggressive truth-squadding of the assertions coming from the White House. President Bush, for instance, yesterday called the program the &#8220;most potent tool we have in protecting America and foiling terrorist attacks.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Can he back that up? What little investigative reporting I&#8217;ve seen on the program thus far, by Ron Suskind among others, suggests that Bush&#8217;s assertion is exaggerated or just plain wrong &#8212; and that in fact the use of torture or near-torture has produced little or no valuable information. It&#8217;s imperative that the media give the public a better sense of whether Bush is credible on this issue.<\/p>\n<p>Here&#8217;s a question reporters should be asking: If, as Suskind has alleged, the administration is aware that those harsh CIA interrogation tactics don&#8217;t really work &#8212; and no one is currently in CIA detention anyway &#8212; then why is this such an important issue for the White House? One possible answer: That this has nothing to do with the future; that it&#8217;s about giving them cover for their actions in the past.<\/p>\n<p>Here&#8217;s another question reporters should be asking: Have the senators been assured that Vice President Cheney won&#8217;t get Bush to attach a &#8220;signing statement&#8221; to this bill, asserting his inherent powers, as he did the last time he signed torture legislation?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Great questions, all. I don&#8217;t imagine we&#8217;ll get much in the way of answers &#8212; indeed, I suspect most of these questions won&#8217;t really be asked &#8212; but in a reality-based world&#8230;.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In the wake of the &#8220;compromise&#8221; on torture between the White House and Senate Republicans, the media coverage has been a bit of a mixed bag. The WaPo and the NYT ran helpful, illuminating op-eds that everyone should read, but a lot of the coverage has been, sadly, more about the politics than the policy. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[617],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8541","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8541","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8541"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8541\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8541"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8541"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8541"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}