Media malfeasance:hard to overstate how foolish

digby: Wrong Again

The torture apologists are out in force trying to confuse and obuscate and the paper of record is helping them do it. Marcy's on it:

As I have pointed out in the last two posts, the NYT has a story up claiming that Jim Comey approved of torture, but that grossly misreads the Comey emails on which the story is based. In fact, the memos appear to show that the White House--especially Dick Cheney and David Addington--were pushing DOJ to approve the torture that had been done to Hassan Ghul, without the specificity to record what they had done to him; in fact, one of the things the push on the memos appears to have prevented, was for Comey and Philbin to have actually researched what happened to Ghul.

But the NYT instead claims that Jim Comey approved of torture legally, even while downplaying his concerns about the "combined techniques" memo that was the focus of his concerns (and not mentioning his response to the third memo).

But there is more news than that in the Comey emails--news the Grey Lady doesn't seem to think is news.

I can't tell you how often I heard over the past week that the crisis in journalism is going to destroy democracy as we know it. How can we live without the great investigative reporting of the papers of record, something with which I agree? But never once did I hear any of those who defend mainstream journalism actually admit the fact that its stuff like this that is killing them as much as anything. The story is factually wrong, which can be proved by their own previous reporting.

Read Marcy's series of posts on this. it's going to take a lot of work to unravel this nonsense. It's journalistic malpractice. Again.

Benen: MESSAGE DISSEMINATION....

As much trouble as conservatives have had with governing, they're adept at not only getting their message out, but getting the media to internalize their talking points.

Here's CNN this morning:

As the world continues to digest and dissect President Obama's historic speech directed at the Muslim world, a senior aide to the president is pushing back on the suggestion that Obama's latest overseas trip amounted to an apology tour.

And here's ABC:

Stephanopoulos says "[w]e've heard some say that this was an apology tour"

Yes, "some" being the Republican National Committee, Republican lawmakers, and Republican activists at Fox News.

Pointing to President Obama's current overseas trip during the June 3 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Gretchen Carlson asserted that "[l]ast time" Obama went to Europe and the Middle East, "a lot of people said, Steve [Doocy, co-host], that he was on an apology tour of sorts." Prominent among those "people" who characterized his April trip as "an apology tour" were many Fox News hosts, contributors, analysts, and regular guests, who often took out of context remarks Obama made during his trip to support their claim. Moreover, Fox News has trotted out its smear for Obama's current trip to Europe and the Middle East, baselessly promoting "another apology tour."

It's hard to overstate how foolish this is. The president's speech in Cairo was an important address, helping establish a new foundation for a stronger relationship between the United States and the Middle East. Obama told some hard truths -- tackling issues U.S. leaders rarely discuss in public, better yet in front of a Muslim audience in Egypt -- and challenged those throughout the region. It's the kind of outreach that can pay dividends for the United States for years to come.

And the main point of interest for much of the traditional media is, "Yeah, but did he apologize?"

First, Obama didn't apologize in Cairo. Second, he didn't apologize in France, either. This is a manufactured fantasy, which major networks are embracing, basically because they've been told to by Americans who hope to undermine the administration's international standing.

The president has been candid with domestic and international audiences about the sources of strained relationships, but candor is not a crime and honesty does not undermine American prestige. Indeed, Fox News and even legitimate news outlets fail to recognize the ways in which the president's rhetoric improves U.S. credibility around the world, and establishes a base upon which improved relations are built.

Instead, Blitzer, Stephanopoulos, and others believe the baseless "apology" nonsense has merit, simply by virtue of Republican repetition.

• For Gawd's sake even Rich Lowry of the National Review understands what happened:

  All that said, the fundamental question about Obama's address is whether it worked as public diplomacy. On balance, will it make the intellectual and political isolation of Islamic extremists more or less likely? Because the speech makes it likelier, it must be judged a success.