The "Stinky Inky," Part IV: More Incompetence, Bias and Dishonesty at the
Philadelphia Inqurier?"
By Walter C. Uhler
Created Sep 25 2006 - 8:23am
Readers of Frank Rich's new book, The Greatest Story Ever Sold, understand
quite well the crisis of confidence that justifiably afflicts America's
mainstream news media today, due to its largely uncritical (if not
enthusiastic) reporting of the exaggerations and lies by the Bush
administration during the run-up to its illegal, immoral invasion of Iraq.

During the past two years, I've written three articles addressing the
failures of my local newspaper, the Philadelphia Inquirer. They can be found
here [1], here [2], and here [3]. Unfortunately that deterioration has
continued apace, as the two examples below indicate.

In its 23 September 2006 edition, The Philadelphia Inquirer ran a faux news
story by Carlin Romano titled "Premature obit sends book's sales soaring."
Mr. Romano's article addressed both the speech recently given by Venezuela's
President, Hugo Chavez, at the United Nations and his post-speech news
conference. During that news conference Mr. Chavez touted a book by the
world's most formidable intellectual, Noam Chomsky, but mistakenly asserted
that Mr. Chomsky was no longer among the living. Thanks to Mr. Chavez's
advertisement and mistake, Chomsky's book "shot to No. 1 on Amazon."

For a so-called news article (after all, Romano's article neither contained
the warning, "news analysis," nor did it appear in the Inky's editorial
pages), I found his send-up of Mr. Chavez to be quite amusing, but
opinionated. Moreover, even if Mr. Chavez is "never one to get his facts
completely straight," he certainly was correct to assert that Americans
would do better to read Chomsky's book, Hegemony or Survival: America's
Quest for Global Dominance, than to watch Superman movies that "make people
stupid."

But Romano's good humor commenced ringing discordant notes, when he turned
from Mr. Chavez to Mr. Chomsky. First, Romano surely erred when he suggested
that the 77-year old self-effacing Chomsky, "must be careful not to
swagger." Swagger? Perhaps Mr. Romano might be given to swaggering, were a
book of his to become No. 1 on Amazon, but not Mr. Chomsky.

More serious, however, is Romano's outrageous assertion that, in Chomsky's
book is "a world in which, chronology be damned, 9/11 seems like an
understandable response, if not justified one, to our attacks on Afghanistan
and Iraq." Yet, after checking the book for such evidence, I found nothing
in Hegemony or Survival to suggest that Mr. Chomsky is either so illogical
or dishonest as to assert that two events occurring after 9/11 - America's
attacks in Afghanistan and Iraq - make the horrible attacks on 9/11
"understandable."

Consequently, readers who recall his scathing review of Chomsky's book,
9/11 -- in which he called Chomsky a "pop-off" and "Noam the Foam" -- now
have greater reason to question Romano's own integrity. Thus, I challenge
Mr. Romano to clear his name and reassure his readers (including this
reader) by providing evidence to support his seemingly vile "chronology be
damned" accusation. Moreover, I remind Mr. Romano of Henry David Thoreau's
famous observation: "It is not all books that are as dull [or dishonest!] as
their readers."

In fact, in light of recent news reports that: (1) "Nearly 7,000 civilians
were killed in Iraq in the past two months [The Guardian UK, 22 Sept. 2006]
(2) "Torture in Iraq may be worse now than under Saddam Hussein," [AP, 21
Sept. 2006] and (3) "A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American
intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of
Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the
overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks," [New York
Times, Sept 24, 2006] what one reads in Hegemony or Survival seems quite
accurate.

Consider the following from page 2: "Aid organizations with extensive
experience in Iraq and studies by respected medical organizations warned
that the planned invasion might precipitate a humanitarian catastrophe. The
warnings were ignored in Washington and evoked little media interest. A
high-level US task force concluded that attacks with weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) within the United States are 'likely,' and would become
more so in the event of war with Iraq. Numerous specialists and intelligence
agencies issued similar warnings, adding that Washington's belligerence, not
only with regard to Iraq, was increasing the long-term threat of
international terrorism and proliferation of WMD."

Moreover, I challenge the Philadelphia Inquirer to improve upon its "truth
in labeling" practices. Mr. Romano's article was not hard news, but news
analysis or commentary.

Unfortunately, Romano's highly questionable assertion about Chomsky was not
the only significant shortcoming to be found in the Inky that day. The
"Local News" section contained a seriously deficient article mistakenly
equating the negative campaigning by challenger Bob Casey Jr. with that of
sleazy Senator Rick Santorum.

True, an earlier Inky article did highlight an egregiously despicable
commercial by the campaign to elect Santorum, which depicted - via bogus
visuals of Casey campaign planning from a jail cell - Mr. Casey's campaign
team as "a bunch of shady characters with serious legal problems."
["Santorum ad impugns ethics of Casey 'team,'"Philadelphia Inquirer, Sept.
14, 2006] Moreover, the article correctly noted that "none" of the
individuals mentioned in Santorum's despicable commercial "has taken a
formal role in the Casey organization or has contributed money to his senate
campaign."

Yet, the Inky's article on 23 September 2006 ["Santorum and Casey fire low
in ad warfare"] not only equated Mr. Casey's negative response to Santorum's
first mudslinging commercial with Santorum's second negative salvo -
presumably because both were issued on the same day - it also failed to
report very pertinent findings about Mr. Santorum, which were recently
released by "CREW," Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

CREW's "2nd Annual Most Corrupt Members of Congress Report," contains the
names of the twenty most corrupt members of Congress. Although this writer
was surprised to find Maxine Waters (Dem., CA) on the list of twenty and
John Murtha (Dem., PA) among the five Congressmen to watch, I wasn't
surprised to learn that two specific Pennsylvania Republicans made the
notorious list of twenty - Senator Rick Santorum and Congressman Curt
Weldon.

Most surprising of all, however, was the Philadelphia Inquirer's failure to
include CREW's nonpartisan findings in its reporting about the
Santorum-Casey contest.
_______

--
NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material
available to advance understanding of
political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. I
believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107

"A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their
spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore their
government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are
suffering deeply in spirit,
and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public
debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have
patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning
back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at
stake."
-Thomas Jefferson