 |
| Gail Koch is a junior journalism major and writes 'And Another Thing' for the Daily News. Her views do not necessarily agree with those of the newspaper. |
If you haven't heard about what happened to war journalist Peter Arnett, then chances are you haven't been paying close attention to the news.
The Pulitzer Prize winner and former CNN correspondent was in Baghdad covering the war for "National Geographic Explorer," "NBC News" and MSNBC when he agreed to an interview on Iraqi state television on March 30.
During the interview, Arnett made the mistake of telling Iraqis that the United States' initial war plans had been a failure and that images of civilian casualties were bolstering the anti-war movement.
The 68-year-old's charged words cost him his job.
In separate statements, both National Geographic and NBC fired Arnett the following day, stating that it was wrong of him to appear on a state-controlled program and discuss his personal views.
Since the highly publicized dismissal, Americans have spent the past week pondering whether or not Arnett's firing was fair.
Did the well-known reporter compromise his objectivity and that of his fellow war journalists with his subjective remarks?
Or was he simply reporting another aspect of the war that happened to be unfavorable with the U.S. government?
I think that Arnett knew what he was doing when he spoke those words -- and that what he was doing was wrong.
He may have been making the same remarks as every other news analyst here in the states, but with Arnett it was different.
He was being paid to detach himself as a reporter and provide fair and accurate coverage of the war in Iraq -- not passionate and biased commentary.
Apologizing Tuesday on NBC's "Today Show," Arnett stated, "I'm an American, have been an American for 25 years, and I apologize again."
The irony is that this isn't the first time the native New Zealander has stirred up controversy for making such a thoughtless mistake.
In 1991, Arnett was criticized for anti-American remarks he made while covering the Gulf War for CNN. Seven years later, the cable news network let him go for a false report he made that accused American forces of using sarin nerve gas in Laos in 1970.
As a veteran war correspondent, Arnett should have known his actions last week were both unwise and unethical. But he doesn't seem to be the only journalist capable of doing something so dumb.
Within hours of Arnett's on-air flub, Fox News' Geraldo Rivera was asked by the American military to leave Iraq after drawing maps in the sand during a live report, a move that could have endangered key locations of U.S. troops.
Both Arnett and Rivera miscalculated how such actions would damage their reputations while at the same time further jeopardizing the reliability of 24-hour war coverage.
Viewers who are already wary of reports from the estimated 600 journalists embedded with U.S. troops will now be more cynical than ever and I can't say I blame them.
Because how are viewers expected to trust a group of individuals whose key players have shown they are not afraid to discredit their country or put its soldiers at risk?
Write to Gail at glkoch@bsu.edu
Read More
Three Air Jam teams take home the win
October 12, 2012Nineteen teams shimmied, shook and flipped for a sold out John R. Emens Auditorium on Thursday night during the 25th annual Air Jam.
Bill Clinton Speaks at North Central High School
October 12, 2012Former President's Speech Could Have Effect on State Senate Race
