The bloodshed underlined the impotence of the Iraqi army and police to quell determined sectarian extremists at a time when the Bush administration appears to be considering a move to accelerate the hand-over of security responsibilities.
It must not take too many brains to become a journalist if they needn't be able to distinguish between, say, failing and being a failure. They may ultimately be right in this case, but this article isn't enough to prove it. Did they just screw up this once, or are they incompetent and/or biased?Do the usual suspects (ACU, ADA..) or anyone else rate newspapers for objectivity? Is lack of objectivity in reporting considered an ethical lapse among journalists?
No comments:
Post a Comment