One of the best critiques I have read of the media and how they helped lead us into war. From the New York Review of Books’ feature story, “Now They Tell Us” by Michael Massing.<\/p>\n
If nothing else, the Iraq saga should cause journalists to examine the breadth of their sources. “One question worth asking,” John Walcott of Knight Ridder says, “is whether we in journalism have become too reliant on high-level officials instead of cultivating less glamorous people in the bowels of the bureaucracy. “In the case of Iraq, he added, the political appointees “really closed ranks. So if you relied exclusively on traditional news sources\u2014assistant secretaries and above\u2014you would not have heard things we heard.” What Walcott calls “the blue collar” employees of the agencies\u2014the working analysts or former analysts\u2014were drawn on extensively by Knight Ridder, but by few others.<\/p>\n
The contrast between the press’s feistiness since the end of the war and its meekness before it highlights one of the most entrenched and disturbing features of American journalism: its pack mentality. Editors and reporters don’t like to diverge too sharply from what everyone else is writing. When a president is popular and a consensus prevails, journalists shrink from challenging him. Even now, papers like the Times and the Post seem loath to give prominent play to stories that make the administration look too bad. Thus, stories about the increasing numbers of dead and wounded in Iraq \u2014both American and Iraqi\u2014are usually consigned to page 10 or 12, where they won’t cause readers too much discomfort.<\/i><\/p>\n