Pentagon Papers: Stars & Stripes Reports on DoD Journalist Profiling


3075_aIt appears that there is another news aggregator in the media business, but one of a very different stripe. The official newspaper of the Department of Defense Stars and Stripes reports that the Pentagon has been keeping track of reporters’ coverage of the US Military, grading them as “positive,” “neutral” or “negative.” This, despite strong denials from the Pentagon that no such “tracking” has been taking place.

Earlier this week reports surfaced that, as more journalists sought permission to accompany U.S. forces engaged in Afghanistan, many of them could be screened by The Rendon Group, a public relations firm contracted by the Pentagon to determine whether their past coverage has portrayed the U.S. military in a positive light.

In the wake of that story, officials of both the Defense Department and Rendon denied that any rating system existed. “They are not doing that [rating reporters], that’s not been a practice for some time — actually since the creation of U.S. Forces–Afghanistan”  Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman told reporters Monday. “I can tell you that the way in which the Department of Defense evaluates an article is its accuracy. It’s a good article if it’s accurate. It’s a bad article if it’s inaccurate. That’s the only measurement that we use here at the Defense Department.”

However,  Stars and Stripes uncovered files that appears to approve that such ranking system, and profiling of embedded journalists does in fact exist:

Contrary to the insistence of Pentagon officials this week that they are not rating the work of reporters covering U.S. forces in Afghanistan, Stars and Stripes has obtained documents that prove that reporters’ coverage is being graded as “positive,” “neutral” or “negative.”

Moreover, the documents — recent confidential profiles of the work of individual reporters prepared by a Pentagon contractor — indicate that the ratings are intended to help Pentagon image-makers manipulate the types of stories that reporters produce while they are embedded with U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

Thus far the legality of this program has not yet been determined. And the dates on the files recovered go back to October of 2008, so this appears to be less a partisan issue on which blame would be assigned to Bush Administration or Obama Administration.

One thing is clear: this story is far from over, particularly given the specific denials of the Dept of Defense. Stay tuned.

EmailTwitterFacebookDiggRedditStumble UponYahoo BuzzLinkedInTumblrDelicious


If you would like to comment, please login or register:

» Login » Register

» Or connect with your Facebook account:

Viacom-YouTube Trial Airs Dirty Laundry

video

After 3 years of back-and-forth court battles of Viacom versus YouTube after the media conglomerate was unable to purchase the video sharing site (and was outbid by Google), the court documents that were previously unavailable to the public are finally ready to be seen by America...and they aren't pretty.

David Shuster On Media Bias, Drudge, Andrew Breitbart, And James O’Keefe

video

MSNBC's David Shuster made an appearance at yesterday's White House briefing, and afterward, sat down for an interview for Mediaite. While not a regular presence in the briefing room, Shuster is more than qualified to render an opinion on the journalism being practiced there, and that distance allows him to make fresh observations. In this preview of our interview, I asked Shuster for his take on the position of people like Andrew Breitbart, Matt Drudge, and James O'Keefe in journalism. His response was rather surprising.



© 2010 Mediaite, LLC | About Us | Advertise | Newsletter | Privacy | User Agreement | Disclaimer | Power Grid FAQ | Contact | Archives | Dan Abrams, Founder | Hosting by Datagram | RSS