It can only be attributable to human error.

|

If the death-fart of big media has a sound, it must go something like this chastisement of Farnaz Fassihi's email snafu:

Aly Colon, who teaches ethics at the Poynter Institute in St. Petersburg, Fla., says the simplest course for the Journal would be to reassign Fassihi elsewhere because her views are now so well documented. Paradoxically, her factual observations would have made a terrific first-person account for publication, Colon says.

That's right: The greatest threat to a reporter in 2004 is that people might find out your opinion of the story you're covering.

NEXT: I'm Sure Hugh Hewitt Will Be Very Upset

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Do you mean to say that reporters actually have opinions? I’m shocked — SHOCKED — to hear such a thing.

    Note to Ms. Fassihi: People pass around inflammatory emails, you stupid shit, and they really enjoy doing so!

  2. “I’m stunned at how this has rapidly become a global chain mail,” Fassihi wrote to journalism-industry blogger Jim Romenesko, who posted her message on his site. “I wrote it as a private e-mail to my friends . . . and then it got forwarded around as you can see in a very unexpected way.”

    Disingenuous, to say the least. Or perhaps the key word there is “rapidly”. Perhaps she expected it to take a bit longer.

    As one of Fassihi’s friends’ friends wrote when forwarding the e-mail: “Farnaz’s first-person description brings home the reality of the state of affairs in Iraq in a way that hasn’t been captured by anything else I’ve read lately.

    If Fassihi is guilty (“guilty”) of anything, it’s of effective writing. The story itself has been and is being widely reported – at least in Europe. The Economist (which was, regrettably, in favour of the war) has reported the facts clearly. I’d be surprised if most (literate) Americans weren’t already aware of the dangerous mess your agents have created.

    On another recent blog entry here, there’s a discussion about freedom of the press. As all good conservatives do not hesitate to point out, with freedom comes responsibility. It seems to me that Ms Fassihi has, in writing and disseminating her email, simply lived up to her responsibility.

    Finally… No human being can ever be “objective” about anything. Even science, which depends on the subjective choices of scientists to study particular phenomena.

  3. That’s right: The greatest threat to a reporter in 2004 is that people might find out your opinion of the story you’re covering.

    Well, gosh, she has to stay on-message, doesn’t she?

  4. I cannot believe that you have not put up anything to do with the successful claiming of the X-prize by the team behind Spaceship One. And you call yourselves libertarians . . .

  5. What’s really funny is that this isn’t even a controversial opnion. Everyone except the president and his small cabal of advisors accepts this as reality. Everyone else includes Blair, the CIA, Bremer, Musharref, Diamond, Hagel, Roberts, etc. etc. etc. I know, I know — everyone ACCEPT the president has it wrong. I keep wondering how long till the cognitive disonancce reaches boiling point.

  6. Will Fox put Carl Cameron, who posted mocking, false statements on their website, on vacation? Nope.

  7. Finally… No human being can ever be “objective” about anything. Even science, which depends on the subjective choices of scientists to study particular phenomena.

    Oh, shit, let’s not get into this one again. That line is so tired.

  8. Finally… No human being can ever be “objective” about anything. Even science, which depends on the subjective choices of scientists to study particular phenomena.

    Oh, shit, let’s not get into this one again. That line is so tired.

  9. Will Fox put Carl Cameron, who posted mocking, false statements on their website, on vacation? Nope.

    Should they? Nope! Fox should (and hopefully IS!) just be as sure to use a partisan Democrat (if such an animal exists at Fox) to cover Bush! And all of ’em should cover the third party types.
    Non-Daniel

  10. db: Oh, shit, let’s not get into this one again. That line is so tired.

    Is that objective evidence of your intellectual superiority? Or just the sound of breaking wind?

  11. It must be just me, but I cannot figure out what the big deal is.

    She wrote about how it sucks to work in Iraq. Guess what it probably sucks to work in Iraq.

    NEWS FLASH: Being afraid for your life might actually have a small impact on your writing.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.