Too many people get jobs 'reporting' from the Middle East when they are so ignorant they should not even report from local PTA meetings.

Moreover, online journalists and bloggers can’t have it both ways: They can’t ask for mainstream media parity when their reporting is dead-on and ahead-of-the-curve–and at the same time hide behind the “well, I was just blogging” excuse if their reporting turns out to be as ill-sourced and wrong-headed as the legacy media’s.

To paraphrase an expression: the Right has to do things twice as well as the left to be considered half as good.

Is that fair- no, but it's reality. That NRO jumped on this issue right away instead of obfuscating like TNR is commendable.

Why are editors/publishers so afraid to say those "two little words"... "you're fired!"

This is awful. What in the world could this guy have been thinking? Especially while criticizing Beauchamp?

Every time a pro-America blogger does something like this the MSM picks it up as proof that bloggers can't be seen as "real" reporters.

I'm as angry at this guy as I am at Beauchamp. Shame on him.

This is bad, though at least Kathryn Lopez doesn't offer some lame defense.

re: #5 JammieWearingFool

This is bad, though at least Kathryn Lopez doesn't offer some lame defense.

Well, yes, as a matter of fact she did. Offer some lame defense that is.

re: #3 Jonas Parker

Why are editors/publishers so afraid to say those "two little words"... "you're fired!"

I was thinkin' "Surge Working" but I suppose that is a different topic really...

Good on Michelle for covering this. And good on Kathryn Lopez for owning up. If only TNR did this, then Franklin Foer would have been spared his ass getting hauled by the bloggers.

Given the scrutiny now applied in the Internet world, why do people keep doing this?

Corroboration and verification, are MANDATORY before publishing anything as FACT. For a publisher, when someone says "Good Morning," the only appropriate response is, "Can you verify that?"

re: #9 RedSoxNation

Given the scrutiny now applied in the Internet world, why do people keep doing this?

Because they think Charles, Michelle et al are "stalkers".

BTW, Hello to all.

The town that is about 5 miles down the road from the house is in need of a sidewalk appearance specialists. Thats a street sweeper for the non PC among us. If he wants, I can forward his name for consideration as it is about the only job that he seems qualified to do after falsifying reports.

Who, what, where, when, why and how. Don't screw it up and don't lie.
Fairly simple. Opinion is another matter and "artistic mendacity" is an all too common formula.

Good work in rooting out bad journalism on both sides of the aisle! It's extremely important not to let that sort of stuff go by. Give them all hell.

Left,Right
Pro,Anti

Makes no difference to me. BS is still BS

re: #14 gymnast

Who, what, where, when, why and how. Don't screw it up and don't lie.
Fairly simple. Opinion is another matter and "artistic mendacity" is an all too common formula.

The "artistic" part make it look so purty.

re: #6 Irene NYC

re: #5 JammieWearingFool

This is bad, though at least Kathryn Lopez doesn't offer some lame defense.

Well, yes, as a matter of fact she did. Offer some lame defense that is.

OK, I re-read it. It's a bit mushy, perhaps, but in contrasting NRO's response with that of TNR's defense of Beauchamp, they at least admit there were mistakes rather than fudge about it for months.

re: #15 DeliLama

Good work in rooting out bad journalism on both sides of the aisle! It's extremely important not to let that sort of stuff go by. Give them all hell.

Unlike the left, who circles their wagons, the Right is up front in denouncing fraudulent work from our own. The reason? The left seeks to promote it's agenda, while the Right seeks the Truth. Big difference.

re: #4 kynna

I'm even angrier. He knew, after Beauchamp, that lies like this can't be missed.

He's a liar, and he's hurt every other milblogger out there.

Notice not ONE PEEP from Andrew Sullivan about Scott Beauchamp.
Not one.

wish facts keep Andrew's spirits alive.
eh - who cares what Andrew thinks anyway. The man is no different than socky sock puppet.

I didn't see the original post at NRO. But what kind of stupid reads a story that 4,000-5,000 Hezbollah fighters went into a Christian neighborhood in Beirut and thinks that it can possibly be true short of all out - really, all out - civil war or this alleged incident being splashed all over the front pages of newspapers around the world? I mean, this just fails the smell test if you are half way intelligent. So, the editor failed at Step 1: knowing enough about the world to do her job.

But then, this editor then goes on to defend the indefensible and says:

I thank Smith for his good, brave work. He’s a smart, reliable reporter with a great patriotic spirit and sense of service.

She should be demoted or fired. She's not competent to do her job, suffers from lack of professionalism - not to mention moral clarity - and is a definite liability to NRO.

re: #18 JammieWearingFool

Jammie,

I wouldn't even dream of putting NRO in the same category of TNR. I mean, that's so insulting to NRO.
;)

re: #17 debutaunt

re: #14 gymnast

Who, what, where, when, why and how. Don't screw it up and don't lie.
Fairly simple. Opinion is another matter and "artistic mendacity" is an all too common formula.

The "artistic" part make it look so purty.

And if one wants to get really picky, they can examine the difference between "art", "artfulness", and aesthetics. A "load in a commode" is an execrable example of some peoples ideas that constitute an artfully perverted sense of art, however, Plato would find it impossible to classify the exercise as aesthetic.

Isn't phoney and the 'Middle East" somehow connected? Does the true story ever get reported from that region? I thought the whole thing was based on lies and deception.

We weren’t blogging about Dancing with the Stars there.

Personally- I think this is serious- Smith has damaged the credibility of his fellow milbloggers, and Lopez wants to make light by tossing out a joke. I'm not amused, or impressed. The blogosphere has become a major player in informing the public, and taking power away from the msm. Without the blogosphere, I doubt we'd be seeing the new numbers of Americans now supporting the war due to the surge's success because the msm has hardly reported on it at all. From the msm's coverage, you'd have no idea things were improving in Iraq. It is because of the internet and blogs that people have access to more information than the msm would like us to have. When the credibility of one blogger gets questioned, it reflects on bloggers in general- and the msm loves it.

So- thanks W. Thomas Smith, Jr. You've made the msm's day.

re: #24 gymnast

re: #17 debutaunt

re: #14 gymnast

Who, what, where, when, why and how. Don't screw it up and don't lie.
Fairly simple. Opinion is another matter and "artistic mendacity" is an all too common formula.

The "artistic" part make it look so purty.

And if one wants to get really picky, they can examine the difference between "art", "artfulness", and aesthetics. A "load in a commode" is an execrable example of some peoples ideas that constitute an artfully perverted sense of art, however, Plato would find it impossible to classify the exercise as aesthetic.

But it's so distracting to see all the sparkly stuff on the turd.

re: #14 gymnast

Who, what, where, when, why and how. Don't screw it up and don't lie.

Instead they all aspire to "change things" or "make the world a better place." Good intentions, one could say, but such things do not mix at all with the journalists' specific role in democracy.

If rule is to be By The People, then The People need info. All the info, and nothing but the info.

If the infomation is faked, pre-sorted, hidden, spun, or otherwise already has some sort of viewpoint or agenda attached to it, then the journalist has taken the decision from The People on how or what to believe, and has harmed, not helped, democracy. They have betrayed a sacred trust.

re: #27 debutaunt

re: #24 gymnast

re: #17 debutaunt

re: #14 gymnast

Who, what, where, when, why and how. Don't screw it up and don't lie.
Fairly simple. Opinion is another matter and "artistic mendacity" is an all too common formula.

The "artistic" part make it look so purty.

And if one wants to get really picky, they can examine the difference between "art", "artfulness", and aesthetics. A "load in a commode" is an execrable example of some peoples ideas that constitute an artfully perverted sense of art, however, Plato would find it impossible to classify the exercise as aesthetic.

But it's so distracting to see all the sparkly stuff on the turd.

Don't belittle the sparkle! Some people have taken out student loans approaching six figures to become adept at creating artfully polished turds and sprinkling them with sparkly stuff. Some even earn advanced degrees in essential elements of the professional journalist's craft such as polishing farts and creating sheep's clothing out of whole cloth.

re: #20 Dianna Hi Dianna! I don't want to fight, but I really don't see how he's hurt every milblogger out there. At worst (or best) all he's done is subject their factual reporting to more scrutiny.
If the milboggers stick to the truth, they have nothing to worry about.
See, e.g., Michale Yon.

RedSoxNation says:
"Given the scrutiny now applied in the Internet world, why do people keep doing this?"
Yes, and given that the media of blogs is no mere extension of newspaper and television/radio. It combines all the good attributes of both: the in-depth coverage of print and the instantaneous updating of broadcast.
But most importantly, this particular media creates a network of experts and active skeptics will quickly uncover factitious reports as was the case with Charles and others who uncovered the fake memos of CBS news.

This is a test of NRO's credibility. Do they drop him like a hot rock, or embrace their disgrace?

Unlike the TNR article, it's not clear at all the W. Thomas Smith made a 'false' report as opposed to a 'possibly inaccurate' report. I think we're jumping the gun here, perhaps to show that we're more fair than the other side. Here is his response, taken from NRO:

A Note to Readers [W. Thomas Smith Jr.]

Some unfinished business from before the Thanksgiving holiday: A reporter recently contacted NRO questioning the accuracy of two blog posts I filed for “The Tank” while I was in Lebanon this past September and October.

On September 25, I filed a post, in which I described a “sprawling Hezbollah tent city” near the Lebanese parliament as being occupied by “some 200-plus heavily armed Hezbollah militiamen”: According to the e-mail, my detractors said that, “...there are rarely 200 people there at all — much less ‘heavily armed,’” and, “...at least once a week I walk or jog through this area. I have never seen a civilian carrying a weapon.”

I can’t possibly know what someone else saw or witnessed or where they were jogging or on what day. But I do know this: The Hezbollah camp in late September — and up until the time I left in mid-October — was huge (“sprawling”). And though the tents were very large and many of them closed, I saw at least two AK-47s there with my own eyes. And this from a moving vehicle on the highway above the camp. And in my way of thinking, if a guy’s got an AK-47, he’s “heavily armed.”

Did I physically see and count 200 men carrying weapons? No. If I mistakenly conveyed that impression to my readers, I apologize. I saw lots of men, lots of them carrying walkie-talkie radios, and a tent city that could have easily housed many more than 200. I also saw weapons, as did others in the vehicle with me. And I was informed by very reliable sources that Hezbollah does indeed store arms inside the tents. And they’ve certainly got the parliamentarians and other government officials spooked and surrounded by layers of security.

My detractors’ argument that they had never seen weapons in the camp does not mean there is an absence of weapons. But don’t take my word for it. For further reading, I would recommend this recent AP article (and multiple others) about the increasing prevalence of armed civilians in Lebanon. I would say I was justified in believing not only my sources, but also my own eyes in this case.

Hezbollah is storing and stockpiling weapons all over the country, including a huge “stronghold” — and my detractors are apparently faulting me for using that word, too — in a Beirut suburb, Al Dahiyeh, not far from the tent city. And I’ll go one better than that. They are firing those weapons into the sky almost every time Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah gives a public speech. I saw that too, and I heard the shooting. I watched the tracers. And I saw many of the weapons on at least two ventures into al Dahiyeh.

And as far as whether or not al Dahiyeh is a “Hezbollah stronghold,” that’s exactly what it is (just as the Hezbollah camp near the parliament was a “sprawling tent city”). I called al Dahiyeh a “Hezbollah stronghold” back in September or October. The AP recently called it a “Hezbollah stronghold.” Reuters last week called it a “Hezbollah bastion.” Moreover, it’s an extremely dangerous place that Hezbollah does not want the rest of the world knowing the full truth about.

Now, should I have been more specific in my writing in terms of what I physically witnessed as opposed to what I learned from sources regarding the tent city? I wish I had, but it was a blog, which tends to be less formal. However, when blogs contain original reporting, that reporting needs to be sourced. In the future, I’ll provide more context.
[more here: [Link: tank.nationalreview.com...]
]

Today's universities AND news organisations have to relearn the difference between 'journalism' and 'creative writing'.
The former has no place for bias or embellishment.

What was Smith thinkin'? This is inexcusable of course, but it doesn't shed a negative light on the vast majority of milbloggers.
For one thing, the left never accepts verified truth anyway when it conflicts with their ideology, and the leftist MSM and leeftist bloggers prove that ad infintim.

I give thanks for the vast majority of honest milbloggers, and I'm glad that those on the right actually hold our reporters to the highest of standards.

Comparing this rare incident (from the right) to Beauchamp is ridiculous,
however.
For one thing, Beauchamp has been proven a liar 100% of the time, and he lied to denigrate the real Heroes of our military with the help of his wife and the TNR.

No comparison to that in this story.

I give them half-credit. Only for the up-front mea culpa . They should know better. I think they will learn their lesson

... But it's 'fake but accurate' !

/still stinks, especially on our side that honours truth .

1. Ouch.
2. Let's hope NRO and other conservative bloggers handle it with dignity and full disclosure.

I think some here are jumping the gun, I'd suggest you read NRO'S response, AND Smith's mea culpa, then contrast TNR"s sorry obfuscation of the SAME situation. Like comparing apples to oranges.

When I was debating the Lebanon war on blogs, early on I was taken in by someone who misrepresented the timeline of the history of war between Lebanon and Israel - in Israel's favor.

Never mind the details, but this is the second time I've been lied to about Lebanon from the right...

Now I already knew that 99.98% of what I read from Israel's enemies is bullshit, but now I'm going to have to assume that at least 1/4 of what I read from Israel's supporters is bullshit too.

It really sucks when you can't get reliable information.

NRO's response so far seems much better than TNR's. Let's just hope that NRO continues to respond appropriately and puts TNR to shame. Although with the way TNR has handled their new scandal it appears that never learned from the first time and are incapable of a mea culpa

The thing is, from his "apology", all he had to do was say "I've been told there are 200+ armed in the tent city. I've only seen 2 myself as we drove by." I mean, how hard was that? If you follow Michael Totten (and hopefully hit his tip jar), you will have read his report of his experience in the tent city. He also only saw a few armed HezbAs; And that's exactly and only what he reported.
By misrepresenting opinion as fact, heresay as truth and "reliable sources" as explanation/excuse Smith makes it impossible to believe anything he has written. I, like many others, don't read NRO anymore than I read The Nation (ack, shiver...), but now I certainly will remember that that source, just like the NYT and NBC, CBS and usually ABC, cannot be trusted.
Nice Going. Great work there.

A big thank you to the intellectually honest bloggers and writers like Charles and MM. They are the great ones. The others can cause us (honest conservatives, liberals, and libertarians alike) serious harm in our fight to keep the moonbats down. A quick look at some of the things that the "presidential" contenders will show the importance of this.

So, Charles and Michelle, thank you.

+Photi

The reality has always been that you take all reporting with a grain of salt--the blogosphere allows instant distribution and transgresses multiple barriers of language culture politics and time zones instantaneously--any support leading to certification of credibility and ethic of any source of information must be given with great care and circumspection--LGF has been in the forefront of this essential principle and C.J. a stellar leader in demanding this reliable information paradigm.

Our boy Smith needs to read a book or two on how to be a reporter, needs a little skepticism his own self.

Have 5,000 Hizboolah troops ever been gathered together?

One Ak-47 is "heavily armed"?

His apology stinks almost as badly as the original reports. Let's assume he meant well. Pick it up, Smith.

That said, yes, blogs are less processed and are going to be wrong or bogus more than slower channels, and one should always apply the 48-hour rule, and look for confirming reports. Any blog *reader* becomes an editor. And any reader of the MSM these days, darned well better be a skeptical editor, too.

They got caught up in the moment ... You're fired. Unless NRO fixes the problem permanently, they are off my list of trustworthy sites. Unlike liberals, I want the truth. Apology not accepted.

I read Mr. Smith's explanation and I can not see anything that differs from Michael J. Totten's reporting. Is Michael J. Totten full of it too?

re: #3 Jonas Parker

Why are editors/publishers so afraid to say those "two little words"... "you're fired!"

They're not so afraid at NR: they fired Ann quickly when she went over the line. She was popular. Let's see what more happens. I bet it's immediate ... next day or so. Kathryn Lopez's explanation was lame. They must do more, and quickly.

re: #47 bill-tb

They got caught up in the moment ... You're fired. Unless NRO fixes the problem permanently, they are off my list of trustworthy sites. Unlike liberals, I want the truth. Apology not accepted.

Well - okay, but tell me truly - are they really on your list?
They're my homepage - partly because of their (thus far?) trustworthiness.

FF

re: #22 Irene NYC

I didn't see the original post at NRO. But what kind of stupid reads a story that 4,000-5,000 Hezbollah fighters went into a Christian neighborhood in Beirut and thinks that it can possibly be true short of all out - really, all out - civil war or this alleged incident being splashed all over the front pages of newspapers around the world? I mean, this just fails the smell test if you are half way intelligent. So, the editor failed at Step 1: knowing enough about the world to do her job.

But then, this editor then goes on to defend the indefensible and says:

I thank Smith for his good, brave work. He’s a smart, reliable reporter with a great patriotic spirit and sense of service.

She should be demoted or fired. She's not competent to do her job, suffers from lack of professionalism - not to mention moral clarity - and is a definite liability to NRO.

You are persuasive.

I see that Smith is still posting and "The Tank" at NRO is still active. It seems that until such time NRO completes the investigation:

1. Smith's posting privilege should be temporarily suspended.

2. All posts should be kept on-line for all to see until corrections, disclaimers, etc. are duly and properly applied.

It is my hope that Smith is guilty of nothing more than the sin of repeating an Arab rumor or exaggeration (gee - that never happens) without checking the veracity of the source. Yeah - 5000 militiamen in a neighborhood without having heard of such an event from any other media source is a stretch. Such a claim should have pegged the BS meter immediately. If he was sloppy in his fact-checking, discipline him. If he made it up - fire him.

As for those calling for Mrs. Lopez's head on a platter. Knock it off. You are asking this woman to be absolutely perfect and spot-on 100% of the time in her oversight and editing. If editors had to lose their jobs every time something got past them, there would be no editors.

Give NRO a reasonable amount of time to investigate and report. Also, give them credit for not denying and blaming, as others have done.