MEDIA - LOOKING GLASS NEWS | |
What Patrick Fitzgerald didn't say and the Media didn't ask |
|
by Stan Moore Media Monitors Network Entered into the database on Saturday, October 29th, 2005 @ 19:20:24 MST |
|
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald announced the multi-count criminal
indictment today of "Sleezebag Scooter" Libby, and in Fitzgerald's
statements implied that no other prosecutable crimes had been detected by his
investigation of the Name-the-Plame-for-Shame Scandal. But there is much that
Pat forgot to say, or failed to say, or decided not to say, and the media, which
had ample opportunity to ask better questions, rolled over and acted like it
had a continuing case of Investigative Alzheimer's Disease. For instance, no one asked whether other members of the Bush Administration
would have been indicted had they not received agreements of prosecution immunity
in exchange for their testimony against Mr. Libby and perhaps others. Apparently,
witnesses to the case (or leakers) had identified some officials who may have
been "turned" against others in exchange for immunity, yet the entire
matter received no comment or question today. Even in Mr. Fitzgerald would have
refused to answer in detail questions about issuance of immunity, the press
should have asked -- it is their job to do so. The Press also failed to ask about the scope or potential scope of the Fitzgerald
investigation beyond the limited original focus of the Plame Investigation.
It has been reported that Fitzgerald sought and received authorization to investigate
and prosecute any crimes he may have uncovered in the midst of his original,
limited investigation of who named Plame. Today, Fitzgerald spoke only of the
Plame Affair and did not speak of any aspects of investigations he may have
initiated as a result of things learned. And the media did not press him for
any information on the matter. For instance, it has been reported that Fitzgerald
is also investigating the forgery of documents related to the yellowcake uranium
"transaction" and possible criminal behavior in connection with those
forgeries. Today the media said not a word about this sort of expansion of the
scope of the original investigation. The media seems to have settled into a mode of newsgathering with the use of
sensationalism whenever possible, but without hard-nosed investigative journalism
or healthy suspicion. A good newsperson should be able to consider not only
the newsworthiness of what the government did say, but also what the significance
must be of what the government did NOT say. There were enough issues and things
that Patrick Fitzgerald did NOT say today to have perked up the nose of a good
investigative reporter in real time. But maybe the media and the alternative
media just didn't notice, or didn't cover the event with their best people.
One has to wonder, where was Democracy Now today when the questions
were being asked? Where were Free News Radio and Flashpoints and where were
Greg Palast and the other members of "progressive" or left wing media?
These people will have plenty to say about what Patrick Fitzgerald
did say today, but why did they not attend the press conference and ask the
relevant questions in real time? Why did they not force Mr. Fitzgerald to acknowledge
the incompleteness of his statements? With inattentiveness of the corporate media and non-presence of the
left-wing media, the American public continues to suffer from news neglect.
We have 24 hours of news availability on hundreds of television stations in
hundreds of markets, but we do not get our necessary ration of truth and facts
to allow our democracy to stay healthy. When the government and the complicit
media completely control the content of the news, the public only hears what
it is supposed to hear, and this favors the status quo, not the real public
interest. |