Media Selectivity

The AP has a news story, “Did the Harsh Interrogation Methods Actually Work?” (see here). Remember the CIA documents that demonstrate the success of the enhanced interrogation techniques, according to Cheney? The AP read the documents more closely and concluded that they may not have been necessary or effective.

I have no problems with the media reading documents closely rather than superficially. My problem is that it’s pretty selective about when it does so. Remember the 2006 Senate report that said our activity in the Middle East had actually strengthened Al-Qaeda? The report also discussed ways that Al-Qaeda was weaker after the Bush Administration’s policies, as well as encouraged the U.S. to continue its mission in Iraq. Yet, only Fox-News and talk radio informed us of that. The mainstream media went with the superficial reading rather than looking for any nuance in the document.

The same goes with the media’s treatment of Sarah Palin. When the Alaska state legislature came out with its report on Palin, the AP’s story was entitled, “Report: Palin Abused Power.” The title didn’t convey much nuance!

I don’t think that the mainstream media should give Republicans a free pass. I’m glad that they read documents closely. I just wish they’d do so more often, not just when it suits their liberal agenda.