By R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. on 11.1.07 @ 12:08AM
Why is conservative media free of the plagiarism and bogus news stories that plague every liberal outlet from the New York Times to the New Republic?
WASHINGTON -- The other day while laying down my thoughts on the
forty years of conservative journalism that I have undergone so
painlessly since perpetrating my first published wisecrack in the
autumn of 1967, I rang up El Rushbo for his collaboration. That
would be Rush Limbaugh for the benighted; for the millions in his
daily radio audience, he is El Rushbo. Rush recalled the liberal
media monopoly that existed in the late 1960s and that now is
sorely pressed by the emergence of talk radio, of various
conservative journals and newspapers, and by the rise of Fox News.
He noted how arrogant the liberal media have always been and
mentioned their "lies and deceits."
Hang on, Rush. Who do you think you are talking about, Dan
Rather, the heir to Walter Cronkite's ermine robes? Are you
referring to such revered institutions as the New York
Times or the New Republic? Have you no respect for
CNN, CBS, NBC, or the Boston Globe? Okay, okay, each of
these revered institutions of the liberal orthodoxy has had its
embarrassing pratfalls into plagiarism and bogus news stories, but
how about us conservatives, El Rushbo?
Actually, in looking back over the past 40 years of conservative
journalism, no similar scandals shimmy and strut before my mind's
eye. In fact, conservatives have had no Jayson Blairs or Stephen
Glasses. And now there is the New Republic's discredited
"Baghdad Diarist," one Scott Thomas Beauchamp, who fabricated tales
of American military misconduct in the Iraq war and whose
fabrications the editors of the New Republic hope will
disappear behind the smog of their pious pifflings. Let us call
that a hoax heaped upon a hoax.
The fault of conservative journalists is, if you listen to our
critics, that we have political opinions of a conservative nature.
In fact, journalists of the liberal persuasion (or should I say
faith) have informed me over the years that because of my
conservative point of view I cannot really be considered a
journalist. Precisely what they mean by that I cannot tell you.
Though now after reviewing the comparative innocence of
conservative journalism these past four decades as compared with
the scores of blemishes on mainstream media's record, I guess it
could mean that I have not plagiarized or written bogus stories.
Since the late 1980s I have kept a file on the frauds committed by
journalists at major media organizations and it makes grisly
reading.
In fact, in reading over my files on plagiarism and fraud, both
by journalists and by scholars, I felt a pang of sadness for some
of the perpetrators -- an unusual emotion for me, I admit, but
there you have it. I shall not remind readers of the identity of
one of my favorite plagiarists, a New York Times writer (a
Pulitzer Prize winner) whose report on an alleged plagiarism in
Boston contained...yes, you guessed it, plagiarism. And I do not
want to identify the famed columnists who have been caught making
up stories. They have moved on in life. That Washington
Post writer from the early 1980s who copped a Pulitzer for a
bogus story -- let us forget his/her name too.
Yet why not remind readers of Dan Rather's aspersions on
President George W. Bush's service in the Texas National Guard?
Rather's evidence was obviously faked, yet Rather is still claiming
some sort of Higher Accuracy. Or how about the CNN-Time
story from the late 1990s claiming on doubtful evidence that U.S.
forces used nerve gas in Laos? A president of NBC News resigned
after admitting in 1993 that his Dateline NBC report of an
exploding General Motors truck was a hoax, and four years later a
Pulitzer was conferred on him for of all things editorial writing.
Perhaps some journalist statute of limitations had passed.
The New York Times, however, deserves special mention
for the likes of Jayson Blair, who both plagiarized and fabricated
a whole string of stories before being fired in 2003 along with two
editors. A year earlier the paper had to fire a New York Times
Magazine writer after the magazine published his phony story.
And just weeks after Blair's departure the Times's Rick
Bragg, another Pulitzer winner, left after being suspended for
using another reporter's work as his own. In the summer of 2003 the
Villager, a small newspaper in Greenwich Village, charged
the Times with basing stories for three years on
Villager stories and even using the same people the
Villager used in their stories.
All of which brings me back to El Rushbo and his observance of
the passing liberal monopoly in media. Perhaps as conservatives
continue to break the liberal monopoly the liberals will raise
their journalistic standards. Or maybe they will get worse. Most of
the aforementioned plagiarisms and hoked-up stories took place in
recent years.
topics:
Mainstream Media, Military, Iraq