CBS Correspondent Killed Story at Pentagon's Request

[NoodleyAppendage]

CBS Pentagon correspondent David Martin acknowledged Monday that he killed a report about how the U.S. was dealing with Improvised Explosive Devices in Iraq after a senior military officer complained that it contained information useful to the enemy. Martin, writing on the CBS blog Public Eye, said that the report had been scheduled to air as the lead story on the CBS Evening News on Thursday and that he pulled it just one hour before airtime.

Story Link

-------------

Maybe we should start investigating whether David Martin is CIA or a Psy-Ops plant?

[Trillo]

1. If the story was prior to publication, how did a senior military

officer know enough about its contents to complain?

Perhaps the problem isn't the correspondent, but the system's 'approval' structure. (I don't know)

[THUNDER HANDS]

8. well

if you have information, you ask for comments from the military. Obviously the military knew the information the reporters did, and asked the editors to kill the story for security concerns.

Its not that shocking, actually, I'm sure this isn't the first time this has happened.

[NoodleyAppendage]

9. Certainly wasn't the first time for the reporter in question...

He was duped "numerous times" by the Pentagon by his own admission. Why the continued trust, I don't know.

JB

[THUNDER HANDS]

13. well

I don't think its a question of trust. I think its more a question of access. If he publishes this story, the best thing that can happen to him is that the military refuses to grant him access and make his reporting life so miserable that CBS has no choice but to pull him off that beat.

The worst thing that could happen is that his story leads to the insurgency gleaming some usable information out of his story and causing more military casualties.

Its not exactly an easy choice for a reporter.

[NoodleyAppendage]

15. Goes both ways...Pentagon needs reporters for propaganda efforts.

Media manipulation goes on during wartime...I understand that. But, when there are repeated instances of being duped, one begins to wonder if the reporter's loyalty is to the American public or to his Pentagon overloads.

JB

[Jackpine Radical]

2. There are some things that shouldn't be printed in wartime.

I have no idea if this is one of those things. But if we have some way of reducing the threat of bomb attacks, and the method could be defeated if the enemy knew what we're doing, then I would support pulling the story.

[Nickster]

4. I'd have to agree with you.

[NoodleyAppendage]

5. But, he was asked numerous times to do the same recently...

Read the original article and you will see that he pulled stories numerous times because the Pentagon gave him the same excuse, then it turned out (by his own admission) that revealing the story would NOT have been a problem.

Please tell me why we should trust a governmental organization that has lied to us consistently; engages in torture; and generally circumvents what America used to stand for?????

Trust is earned, not given blindly.

JB

[Mandate My Ass]

6. from the link

Martin further acknowledged that he had set aside other stories at the request of the Pentagon "a number of times over the years, and each time it's turned out that going with the story wouldn't have caused any harm."

[cali]

3. Maybe he's just a journalist

doing his job in a tough environment. You do realize he was under no obligation to report that he'd killed the story, thus making him vulnerable to suggestions like yours?

[NoodleyAppendage]

7. Fool me...fool me twice...we...we...we won't get fooled again.

He pulled the story even after the Pentagon lied to him numerous times about the necessitity to pull prior stories, which turned out to not be the case. Maybe he's a journalist with a serious gullibility problem?

JB

[EST]

10. There exists little proof that we are at war.

What was appropriate was a massive police action but this outfit wishes to keep everybody's nerves on edge and take away liberty. Bush, himself, while holding that this is a war on terror and then trying to change the context by a name change, has stated repeatedly that we are not actually at war.
Seems to me the time is long past that such "wartime" sensitivity is necessary.

[NYC Liberal]

11. I read that as: "CBS Correspondent Killed at Pentagon's Request"

at first glance.

[mom cat]

12. That is what I thought I saw too!

[NYC Liberal]

14. Sadly, I wouldn't have been surprised if that WAS the headline!

What with all the shit that's happened since these criminals have taken over. *sigh*

[Radio_Guy]

17. It was probably either/or

Either the story or the journalist.

[PassingThrough]

16. Lol, me too.