The discussion Monday at the Wilson Center of “The Media and Iran’s Nuclear Program: An Analysis of US and UK Coverage, 2009-12” began with the familiar litany of complaints about the media’s pre-Iraq war coverage: lack of critical analysis, an over reliance on White House sources, lack of precise wording and a narrow pre-war context. Are we falling into the same trap with Iran?
The panel discussed a new report from the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland. Co-author Jonas Siegel laid out the reports major findings:
Panelist Walter Pincus of the Washington Post was critical of the report. He thought the authors had shown their own bias toward the issues while also giving their prescription for how the press should act. Every newspaper need not provide deep coverage of an issue. The press should represent one side of a discussion and leave it to the citizen to reach an informed conclusion. Commentary from the audience reflected Pincus’ point: “How can the media be held to such a high standard when dealing with an issue like Iran that no one can get to the truth of?”
Steinbruner concluded with a general point. This report is an indication that our discussion of Iran’s nuclear program is defective and prone to political mis-coverage. Sensationalist and selective reporting has far reaching and damaging repercussions. He ended saying, “that’s not really who we are, and in this situation, that’s not how we want to be.”
The Administration is weakening the United States. That is the only thing at which it…
This war should end with a prosperous, democratic Ukraine in Europe. If I can contribute…
The question is whether the demonstrators can exploit the moment to unseat a wily and…
US aid will be a cash cow for Trump donors, a mainstay of autocratic regimes…
Might makes right can work for a while. But in the end they will need…
The simple fact is we were better off on January 19 than we are today.…