Opinion: The media's duty is to report news, not to demoralize

The headline in your paper on Oct. 29 read: Wayward bomb kills 13 civilians. I don't think there is an American that didn't think that some innocent people would be killed in this conflict. Why did you have to give that a headline on Page 1 while the massacre of innocent Catholics in Pakistan by alleged terrorists during a church service received a small, insignificant amount of reporting on Page 2 of your paper?

Isn't this whole thing about the terrorists who chose to attack our country and now see fit to attack more innocent people who are supportive of our efforts to root out these savages?

Your reporting must be quite disconcerting to our brave young men and women who do not want to see innocent people killed any more than anyone else. You don't have to keep pounding America with our mistakes. The pilots are doing a great job of protecting this country and deserve fewer cheap shots by the media. I'm sure it is psychologically difficult enough to drop bombs on people without the constant guilt trip when some mistakes are made.

It might serve you well to reorder your priorities. The Catholic massacre should have been on Page 1 to remind the American people what kind of animals we are up against in this struggle. You certainly have a duty to report all the news as well as a duty not to demoralize our military.
-- Francis P. Bunting, New Port Richey

Undermining the war effort

Articles and photographs in your newspaper consistently undermine the war effort. They humanize the enemy. They are defeatist. They harp repeatedly upon unavoidable civilian casualties.

We are at war, people. You are with us, or you are against us. There is no middle ground.
-- Lee Skipwith, St. Petersburg

Times' patriotism is suspect

One often has to wonder just whose side the St. Petersburg Times is on in the "War on America". In the Oct. 29 edition, you trumpet (in over half-inch type) that Wayward bombs kill 13 civilians and give this story front page exposure, as well as practically all of Page 6A, casting blame on the United States for a missile that happened to have accidentally hit homes near Kabul and killed residents. Meanwhile, on Page 2, in much smaller type, is hidden a story about gunmen who burst into a Catholic church in eastern Pakistan on Sunday morning and killed "at least 16 people, including the clergyman and several children."

Just why would you emphasize the fact that a wayward bomb from the United States happened (by mistake) to kill 13 civilians in Afghanistan, yet almost casually dismiss a much more significant story about a deliberate attack by Islamic extremists who killed even more innocent people? Your patriotism is suspect!
-- Bob Lindskog, Palm Harbor

Creating public opinion

Re: Wayward bombs kill 13 civilians, Oct. 29.

I cannot believe your decision to run a front page headline about civilian deaths caused by U.S. bombs. Of course there are civilian deaths; it is not possible to have a war without them. This is not just reporting the news, it is attempting to create public opinion.

Just for your information, I, along with every person I know, am not concerned about civilian loss of life. I care about American troops and victory -- in that order. Please make some attempt to get in touch with the American public and report the news we are concerned with, not Taliban propaganda.
-- Tom Arcand, Wesley Chapel

The media's slanted conclusions

Re: Americans dubious of winning terrorism war, Oct. 30.

This article summarizing the results of the New York Times/CBS News poll is a glaring example of the ability of the media to put their own negative spin on the news. The latest poll consisted of 86 questions, the results of which showed that Americans are overwhelmingly in support of the war effort, its ultimate success and their government. Of questions pertaining to our winning of the war, 79 percent approve of the way the president is handling the situation, 88 percent approve of the military attacks, 70 percent think that Osama bin Laden will be captured or killed, 83 percent believe the war in Afghanistan is going well, 84 percent think our alliance will hold together and 76 percent think the U.S. government can protect them from future terrorist attacks. Does this sound like Americans are dubious of winning the terrorism war to you? Perhaps it is unfair of me to single out the Times, because all of our media have stooped to this tactic in order to sell their news. Personally, I am sick of being told by television and newspapers how scared and "dubious" I should be -- particularly when the facts don't back them up.

In the future, please just give us the survey results so we can decide for ourselves what it means. Save your spin on the news for the editorial page.
-- Paul Herman, New Port Richey

Restless media creating "news"

On the Oct. 29 evening news, Peter Jennings made the assertion that many people were becoming impatient with an apparent lack of progress in the bombing war in Afghanistan.

Who is impatient? I am not impatient. My wife is not impatient. None of my neighbors are impatient. No one at my church has expressed any impatience. Mr. Jennings reported that Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt have expressed the view that the bombing has gone on long enough. I imagine that the Afghans feel the same way. Americans are not concerned with impatience of the enemy. As long as we are bombing Afghanistan, Mr. bin Laden is unlikely to be plotting major campaigns. Who is impatient to stop harassing Mr. bin Laden?

With little to report that is new each day from Afghanistan, the media are evidently becoming restless for a change in the status quo. If the media would stick to reporting the facts rather than creating "news" that does not exist, we would be a lot better off.
-- J. George Caldwell, Clearwater

Limit anthrax information

I am a retired Navy commander who spent three years during the Korean War in a Navy biological lab. I had to have top-secret clearance to know some of the information I am finding in the newspapers. It was also on a need-to-know basis.

The article on making anthrax into a weapon in the Oct. 18 Times was particularly disturbing.

I suggest that any further articles on anthrax or any other biological warfare agent be on a need-to-know basis and not offer directions on how to manufacture or disperse it.
-- L. James Wiley, Tampa

Dateline program exposed hate

The local media are failing to inform the community of the local links to terrorism. The role of Dr. Sami Al-Arian, the University of South Florida professor whose questionable activities make him a virtual front-man for Islamic Jihad, has been muted in our local media. In fact, at times, he has been treated as a victim of government persecution.

We are, therefore, grateful that NBC's Dateline program on Oct. 28 confirmed the fact that he, indeed, has played a sinister role in efforts on behalf of terrorist organizations. Viewers of the program could hear the hate for both our own United States and Israel from Al-Arian's mouth.

When will we wake up to Al-Arian's continued manipulation of our system? The Immigration and Naturalization Service and the FBI have documented Al-Arian's "misuse of visas" and his "aiding and abetting or assisting certain aliens" involved in terrorism to unlawfully enter the United States. This includes Ramadan Abdullah Shallah, the current head of Islamic Jihad -- a major component of Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida terrorist network, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Al-Arian has been successful in buying influence in Congress to dilute our Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. His activities stymied our law-enforcement agencies in their efforts to halt the activities of the terrorists in our midst. It is high time that we put a halt to Al-Arian's activities. He is a resident alien who has been denied citizenship. The media owe it to their readers to report his activities fully.
-- Norman N. Gross, Ph.D., president, Promoting Responsibility in Middle East Reporting; chairperson, Greater Florida B'nai B'rith Anti-Hate Committee, Palm Harbor

Editorial allegations were misleading

Re: USF and WISE, editorial, Oct. 2.

Your editorial takes a principled stand on academic freedom, but it contains allegations that are not supported by the facts and could mislead your readers.

You state that the World and Islam Studies Enterprise was a "clearinghouse for Islamic militants in the guise of an academic think tank... ." You neglect to mention that the first director of WISE was Khalil Shikaki, a Ph.D. in political science from Columbia University. After two years at WISE, he returned to the West Bank and became a highly regarded political analyst who has collaborated with Israeli scholars and is frequently quoted in the Western media. It was Dr. Shikaki more than anyone else who established WISE's credibility. The only "Islamic militant" associated with WISE was Ramadan Shallah, but he managed to disguise his true character while in Tampa, and even he was a Ph.D. in economics from Durham University in England. The authors of the articles published by WISE were by reputable American and foreign scholars, but few people have taken the trouble to actually examine WISE's publications.

You state that many of the conferees sponsored at the University of South Florida and at other events were radical Islamic polemicists. The only person who spoke at USF that might fit that category was Hasan Turabi of the Sudan in May 1992. However, that visit to USF came about because Dr. Turabi was in the United States at the invitation of the American Congress' subcommittee on Africa. The roundtable at USF was attended by scholars from 13 universities, and the full text of the day-long discussion was published and made public. The many other speakers on Middle Eastern topics at USF included American and Israeli officials and scholars, and their speeches were most certainly not "incendiary." Accounts of most of these events were published and are available to the public and to the St. Petersburg Times.

You state that "course offerings and campus conferences on the Middle East should be led by scholars with credentials in the field -- not by engineers with an ideological agenda." The implication is that this was not the case at USF. This has been a frequent allegation of local pro-Israeli spokespersons, but when challenged to provide names, courses or events, they have remained silent. The engineering professor, Dr. Al-Arian, never had anything to do with Middle Eastern courses.

As I wrote in the Tallahassee Democrat on Nov. 12, 1995: "Ramadan Abdullah's actions have dealt a serious blow to one university's efforts to establish an American-Islamic dialogue. His actions must not be allowed to destroy this effort." Unfortunately his actions and the continuing efforts of the likes of Fox News' Bill O'Reilly have done just that.
-- Arthur L. Lowrie, U.S. Foreign Service officer (retired), former adjunct professor at USF, Lutz

Share your opinions

We invite readers to write to us. Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731.

They can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com or by fax to 893-8675.

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.

Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length. We regret that not all letters can be published.
--

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page