Secretary Gates is Spot On
Last paragraph from Secretary of Defence Robert Gates’ letter to Thomas Curley, President and Chief Executive Offer of The Associated Press, concerning the publication of a photograph of Lance Corporal Joshua Bernard, United States Marine Corps, as he lay fatally wounded in Afghanistan.
I cannot imagine the pain and suffering Lance Corporal Bernard’s death has caused his family. Why your organization would purposefully defy the family’s wishes knowing full well that it will lead to yet more anguish is beyond me. Your lack of compassion and common sense in choosing to put this image of their maimed and stricken child on the front page of multiple American newspapers is appalling. The issue here is not law, policy or constitutional right – but judgment and common decency.
The Associated Press statement concerning this affair can be found here. A Small Wars Council discussion on this issue can be found here.
Agree Dave!
And so is Tom Ricks on this topic at his blog.
gian
When members of the media claim that they need to inform the public about the horrors of war, what they mean is that the public must not understand war as well as the journalists do. Otherwise, the public’s attitude would more closely mirror the media’s. Journalists are so smart that they cannot be wrong. If someone disagrees with the journalists, then that person must lack sufficient information. I mean, having sufficient information, how could a person reach a conclusion different from that of the journalist? It could not possibly be a mere difference of opinion. Therefore, the journalist feels the need to publish stuff like this, to “better inform” us.
Tom Ricks – and what you probably do not know is that he is on Small Wars Foundation / Small Wars Journals Board of Advisors – chimes in with What the hell was the AP thinking? at Foreign Policy’s Best Defense Blog. Tom provides a journalist’s point of view on this sensitive matter.
Tom quotes a dear SWJ friend in his post:
Bob Goldich, a friend of mine whose son served as a Marine in Iraq, observes that, “the photo was not of LCpl Bernard after he had died-it was while he was dying. I think this is crucial. The dead feel no pain. But the dying do, and publishing the photo transmitted LCpl Bernard’s pain to his family.”
See Jules Crittenden at Forward Movement – “Professional Issues”.
Herschel Smith, at The Captain’s Journal, also chimes in at Publishing the Marine Photo: Remember the Words of Christ.
When Cindy Sheehan was on the news 4 times a day, we were told that she had ‘absolute moral authority’ over the war coverage due to the death of her son. So everyone was supposed to do what she wanted or face the wrath of the media.
What happened to that rule of journalism in this case?
Although I must admit that I cannot read minds, I do not believe that the AP was motivated by some moral drive to “document, for now and for history, the events of this war”. I suspect their decision was driven by commercial interest and/or ideological bias. Had the family not specifically requested that the AP not publish this image, I would be more accepting of the AP’s position. But to reject the request of a father who has lost his son in defense of the United States is disgusting. Between the substance of Lance Corporal Bernard and Thomas Curley lies a great gulf.