Reply
Fri 11 Apr, 2003 03:53 pm
I have mixed feelings about CNN's silence on these matters. Were all the deaths and tortures worth the price of keeping CNN's bureau open and obtaining a few interviews? ----BumbleBeeBoogie
The News We Kept to Ourselves
By EASON JORDAN, chief news executive at CNN.
4/10/03
ATLANTA ?- Over the last dozen years I made 13 trips to Baghdad to lobby the government to keep CNN's Baghdad bureau open and to arrange interviews with Iraqi leaders. Each time I visited, I became more distressed by what I saw and heard ?- awful things that could not be reported because doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff.
For example, in the mid-1990's one of our Iraqi cameramen was abducted. For weeks he was beaten and subjected to electroshock torture in the basement of a secret police headquarters because he refused to confirm the government's ludicrous suspicion that I was the Central Intelligence Agency's Iraq station chief. CNN had been in Baghdad long enough to know that telling the world about the torture of one of its employees would almost certainly have gotten him killed and put his family and co-workers at grave risk.
Working for a foreign news organization provided Iraqi citizens no protection. The secret police terrorized Iraqis working for international press services who were courageous enough to try to provide accurate reporting. Some vanished, never to be heard from again. Others disappeared and then surfaced later with whispered tales of being hauled off and tortured in unimaginable ways. Obviously, other news organizations were in the same bind we were when it came to reporting on their own workers.
We also had to worry that our reporting might endanger Iraqis not on our payroll. I knew that CNN could not report that Saddam Hussein's eldest son, Uday, told me in 1995 that he intended to assassinate two of his brothers-in-law who had defected and also the man giving them asylum, King Hussein of Jordan. If we had gone with the story, I was sure he would have responded by killing the Iraqi translator who was the only other participant in the meeting. After all, secret police thugs brutalized even senior officials of the Information Ministry, just to keep them in line (one such official has long been missing all his fingernails).
Still, I felt I had a moral obligation to warn Jordan's monarch, and I did so the next day. King Hussein dismissed the threat as a madman's rant. A few months later Uday lured the brothers-in-law back to Baghdad; they were soon killed.
I came to know several Iraqi officials well enough that they confided in me that Saddam Hussein was a maniac who had to be removed. One Foreign Ministry officer told me of a colleague who, finding out his brother had been executed by the regime, was forced, as a test of loyalty, to write a letter of congratulations on the act to Saddam Hussein. An aide to Uday once told me why he had no front teeth: henchmen had ripped them out with pliers and told him never to wear dentures, so he would always remember the price to be paid for upsetting his boss. Again, we could not broadcast anything these men said to us.
Last December, when I told Information Minister Muhammad Said al-Sahhaf that we intended to send reporters to Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq, he warned me they would "suffer the severest possible consequences." CNN went ahead, and in March, Kurdish officials presented us with evidence that they had thwarted an armed attack on our quarters in Erbil. This included videotaped confessions of two men identifying themselves as Iraqi intelligence agents who said their bosses in Baghdad told them the hotel actually housed C.I.A. and Israeli agents. The Kurds offered to let us interview the suspects on camera, but we refused, for fear of endangering our staff in Baghdad.
Then there were the events that were not unreported but that nonetheless still haunt me. A 31-year-old Kuwaiti woman, Asrar Qabandi, was captured by Iraqi secret police occupying her country in 1990 for "crimes," one of which included speaking with CNN on the phone. They beat her daily for two months, forcing her father to watch. In January 1991, on the eve of the American-led offensive, they smashed her skull and tore her body apart limb by limb. A plastic bag containing her body parts was left on the doorstep of her family's home.
I felt awful having these stories bottled up inside me. Now that Saddam Hussein's regime is gone, I suspect we will hear many, many more gut-wrenching tales from Iraqis about the decades of torment. At last, these stories can be told freely.
CNN chief stands by Iraq omissions
April 12, 2003
CNN chief stands by Iraq omissions
By Jennifer Harper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
CNN's chief news executive Eason Jordan yesterday disclosed that his network withheld details of Saddam Hussein's brutality from its coverage to protect CNN employees.
Alarming facts about secret police, abductions, beatings, dismemberment and assassinations under the Iraqi dictator were not reported to the public, Mr. Jordan wrote, "because doing so would have jeopardized Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff."
"I felt awful having those stories bottled up inside me," Mr. Jordan wrote in an editorial titled "The News We Kept to Ourselves" published yesterday in The New York Times. "At last these stories can be told freely."
In an interview with The Washington Times, Mr. Jordan stood by his decision yesterday, saying he felt "relieved" and was "absolutely sure I did the right thing holding these stories."
CNN coverage, he said, had already offered evidence of "the brutality in Iraq," and the move was not intended to "preserve CNN's presence in Iraq."
"We've already been thrown out of Iraq several times. And we are proud we've been thrown out," he said. CNN correspondents were expelled from Baghdad last month.
Some are baffled by it all.
"I was stunned by that op-ed," Fox News Channel and ABC radio host Sean Hannity told The Times yesterday. "Doesn't CNN have a journalistic obligation to report these kind of details, or to make their reporters aware of them? You can bet if CNN made discoveries about, say, a conservative administration, they would share them."
The editorial "sounds like a confession more than anything," Mr. Hannity said. "And I found it hypocritical."
Rich Noyes, director of research at the conservative Media Research Center, said that "Jordan now admits that CNN kept many of Saddam's secrets.
"Have other networks also censored their own tales of Saddam's evil?" he asked.
"If accurate reporting from Iraq was impossible, why was access to this dictatorship so important in the first place? And what truths about the thugs who run other totalitarian states ?- like North Korea, Cuba and Syria ?- are fearful and/or access-hungry reporters hiding from the American public?" Mr. Noyes said.
But Mr. Jordan had more dramatic revelations to justify his decision.
In companion pieces telecast on CNN yesterday, he said: "There were people in Iraq who believed that CNN was effectively the CIA."
Saddam's regime had accused CNN reporters of working for the CIA and Israel, Mr. Jordan said, and planned to attack them in northern Iraq last month.
The plot was discovered by Kurdish police, who arrested two Iraqi intelligence agents. CNN obtained their videotaped confessions.
Meanwhile, an Iraqi official told Mr. Jordan that "the severest possible consequences" awaited CNN correspondents and that the network's presence in the region "was a violation of Iraqi sovereignty."
According to Mr. Jordan, officials warned other news organizations that anyone caught helping CNN cover the war in Iraq would be jailed.
Tom Rosenstiel of the Project for Excellence in Journalism supports Mr. Jordan's decision, and described him as "obviously tortured" yesterday.
"He wrote an extraordinary and sensible essay," Mr. Rosenstiel said. "He was weighing out his journalistic responsibility and his human responsibility. It's a difficult task, but it comes with the territory of an editor who is responsible for his people ?- and the news."
Fox News media analyst Eric Burns said he "commended" Mr. Jordan, if he had indeed protected innocent people from harm.
"But why reveal all this now? Maybe CNN wants to cash in on the current pro-liberation sentiment," Mr. Burns said.
"If he had knowledge he couldn't reveal, then I hope that it would at least be reflected in CNN's coverage."
Barbara Cochran of the Radio and TV News Directors Association said Mr. Jordan was right not to reveal information that could endanger lives, citing the association's code of ethics, "which addresses balancing the harm you do with the news you present."
What is with the Fox commentary? "Why reveal this now..." Because Saddam is no longer in power and therefore can't, in fact, kill those people! "Doesn't CNN have a journalistic obligation to report these kind of details, or to make their reporters aware of them? You can bet if CNN made discoveries about, say, a conservative administration, they would share them."

Wha...? And that would put people at significant risk of death and torture? Does Fox know something about the current administration they aren't telling?
sozobe wrote:What is with the Fox commentary? "Why reveal this now..." Because Saddam is no longer in power and therefore can't, in fact, kill those people!
This is the quandry no? If the story had been revealed 12 years ago CNNs "sources" may have very well been killed - Jordan obvioulsy had good reason to believe they would have been.
But.. How many people have been killed over the last 12 years because no one acted? How many others were allowed to be tortured in the mean time? Would the world have stepped in sooner had stories such as this been reported?
The quandry highlighted by this story is a classic one. Should the lives of a few people be placed at risk for a possible greater benefit of the lives of many? And what is the responisbility of a free press in that quandry?
I wasn't surprised by this stuff -- appalled, to be sure, but was it such a surprise to anyone? I don't think it's ever really been on the table that Saddam was really, really, REALLY bad -- just how to best deal with it.
By the way, I haven't decided about what I think about CNN's actions. But what leapt out at me were the Fox quotes.
The rest of the "Why reveal this now?" quote, for exmaple:
Quote:"But why reveal all this now? Maybe CNN wants to cash in on the current pro-liberation sentiment,"
I'd say the "Why reveal this now?" question is a good one though
I'm sure FOX is playing this to the hilt since CNN is a competitor.
Yeah. There was another op-ed just below that one in the NYT from an Iraqi exile writing under his real name for the first time since he left, since he hadn't wanted to endanger the family members still in Iraq. I'm sure he was just trying to cash in, too.
Anyone who thinks there isn't information manipulation -- and most notably by Fox -- needs a brain transplant! Much of this will come back to haunt us. A society which rejects naked, unvarnished information reported out as soon as possible rather than "timed for distribution" is a society which doesn't have a free press, isn't smart, and is sliding headfirst, eagerly, down the tubes. I'm sympathetic with CNN's wish to protect its reporters and their families. Jordan probably did the right thing(s), but did anyone else find his "bottled-up" story awfully self-serving?
Tartarin wrote:I'm sympathetic with CNN's wish to protect its reporters and their families. Jordan probably did the right thing(s), but did anyone else find his "bottled-up" story awfully self-serving?
Fox, evidently.
I don't have enough info yet -- I can see it going either way.
Here's the Op-Ed piece I was referring to, btw.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/opinion/11HUSS.html
Yup, Sozobe, I saw that -- and Krugman's piece which is important too. Someone who covers this territory well is Chris Hedges, whose book on being a war correspondent came out last September. There's been a lot of talk about it. For those unfamiliar with it, here's a quick and easy intro:
http://query.nytimes.com/search/full-page?res=9B06E6D61F3DF931A15753C1A9649C8B63
CNN its Iraq atrocities silence, unrelated to access
CNN says its silence on Iraq atrocities had nothing to do with maintaining access
Monday, April 14, 2003
San Francisco Chronicle
(04-14) 16:09 PDT NEW YORK (AP) --
A top CNN executive kept quiet about some atrocities in Iraq not because the network wanted to protect access but because it worried about putting lives in danger, CNN said Monday.
Eason Jordan, CNN's chief news executive, revealed the incidents in an op-ed piece in The New York Times Friday headlined "The News We Kept to Ourselves."
He said that in the mid-1990s, an Iraqi cameraman working for CNN was tortured because the government believed Jordan worked for the CIA. Reporting the story "would almost certainly have gotten him killed and put his family and co-workers at grave risk," Jordan wrote.
CNN also learned from Kurds that a planned attack on network employees by Saddam Hussein's forces in Kurdish-controlled Northern Iraq was thwarted a few months ago, he said.
Jordan was subsequently criticized by at least two columnists for soft-pedaling news on Iraq to maintain CNN's access to the country by its reporters.
Franklin Foer, an associate editor of New Republic magazine, wrote in The Wall Street Journal on Monday that he was suspicious of Jordan's "outbreak of honesty."
But Foer wrote the he didn't see it as honesty. "If it were, Mr. Jordan wouldn't be portraying CNN as Saddam's victim. He'd be apologizing for its cooperation with Iraq's erstwhile information ministry -- and admitting that CNN policy hinders truthful coverage of dictatorships."
The New York Post, owned by the same company that owns CNN competitor Fox News Channel, headlined Eric Fettmann's column, "Craven News Network."
CNN spokeswoman Christa Robinson noted that CNN reporters have frequently been kicked out of Baghdad by angry authorities, most recently a few days after the start of the war.
"The decision not to report these particular events had nothing to do with access, and everything to do with keeping people from being killed as a result of our reporting," she said.
Reading all of this just made me cry. In the UK I feel I've been truly sheltered from horrific detail and I feel quite ashamed for it. I thank you for bringing this to my attention, and we can only hope and pray that these atrocities can soon stop - forever.
Fishness
Fishness, welcome to Able2Know, glad to have you here.
You will find that forum members try to bring as many issues and opinions about events around the world as possible for discussion. Please contribute your own ideas, too.
BumbleBeeBoogie