NBC's O'Donnell, AP's Pickler uncritically reported Bush's latest attempt to tout "fundamental change" in Iraq
SUMMARY: On Today, Kelly O'Donnell uncritically reported President Bush's claim that the formation of a new government in Iraq is a "fundamental change." Similarly, the Associated Press' Nedra Pickler noted that Bush "embraced the new leadership in Iraq as a turning point in the war." In fact, the Bush administration has touted several purportedly pivotal moments since the beginning of the Iraqi occupation, suggesting each time that the situation in Iraq was about to improve.
On the May 23 broadcast of NBC's Today, NBC News White House correspondent Kelly O'Donnell uncritically reported President Bush's claim, from a speech at the National Restaurant Association Convention in Chicago, that the formation of a new government in Iraq is a "fundamental change." Similarly, a May 22 Associated Press article by reporter Nedra Pickler noted that Bush "embraced the new leadership in Iraq as a turning point in the war." In fact, the Bush administration has touted several purportedly pivotal moments since the beginning of the Iraqi occupation, suggesting each time that the situation in Iraq was about to improve, as Media Matters for America documented when O'Donnell did not challenge Vice President Dick Cheney in a May 7 interview when he claimed that Iraq had reached a "turning point."
O'Donnell did not mention the Bush administration's touting of prior "turning point[s]" in Iraq despite noting that "there are experts who say that one of the challenges for the Bush administration now will be that there is no incremental political challenge to look forward to because there will not be another election for four more years." Text appearing on screen throughout the segment read: "President hails 'fundamental change.' "
In contrast to O'Donnell's and Pickler's reports, a May 22 Washington Post article noted that "Bush has declared turning points and milestones in the war before."
From the May 23 broadcast of NBC's Today:
O'DONNELL: Of the many costs of the war is the president's political credibility and his approval among voters. So, Mr. Bush is making a strenuous appeal that the American public see the formation of a new four-year government there as he does: as a fundamental change for Iraq.
[...]
O'DONNELL: Not the typical setting for President Bush to talk about Iraq -- the National Restaurant Association Convention in Chicago.
BUSH: Iraqis have done more than form a government. They have proved that the desire for liberty in the heart of the Middle East is for real.
O'DONNELL: Yet that optimism is tempered.
BUSH: The government is still a work in progress, and overcoming long-standing divisions will take time.
O'DONNELL: The new government remains unfinished with three key posts left to fill.
MICHAEL O'HANLON (Brookings Institution senior fellow): We should not confuse the process and the symbolism of democracy with the real accomplishments that are needed on the ground to improve the economy, improve the security environment and really build a nation.
O'DONNELL: On the ground, the realities are harsh. The president acknowledged both losses and failures.
BUSH: The progress we have made has been hard-fought and it has been incremental. There have been setbacks and missteps, like Abu Ghraib. They were felt immediately and have been difficult to overcome.
O'DONNELL: And there are experts who say that one of the challenges for the Bush administration now will be that there is no incremental political challenge to look forward to because there will not be another election for four more years.
From the May 23 AP article by Nedra Pickler:
President Bush on Monday embraced the new leadership in Iraq as a turning point in the war but claimed only gradual progress in years of fighting and acknowledged that Americans are uneasy about the outcome.
"I can understand why people are concerned about whether or not our strategy can succeed because our progress is incremental," Bush said in his first speech since the swearing in of a new government over the weekend. "Freedom is moving but it's in incremental steps, and the enemy's progress is almost instant on their TV screens."
[...]
But Bush grabbed onto the political news coming out of Iraq as a way to support his mission in the unpopular war and declare a measure of victory over terrorists.
"The progress we've made has been hard-fought, and it's been incremental," Bush said in remarks to the National Restaurant Association. "There have been setbacks and missteps, like Abu Ghraib, that were felt immediately and have been difficult to overcome. Yet we have now reached a turning point in the struggle between freedom and terror.
"The terrorists fought this moment with all their hateful power, with suicide attacks and beheadings and roadside bombs," he continued. "And now the day they feared has arrived. And with it's come a moment of great clarity: The terrorists can kill the innocent, but they cannot stop the advance of freedom."
This post only leaves me with the impression that any good news coming out of Iraq is "conservative misinformation" in the eyes of Media Matters. I think a new four-year governement should be great news in for all Americans.
In addition, Nedra Pickler already has an established record of cheap shots at the President (here and here). She's hardly a mouth for "conservative information."
My 2 cents.
Iraq is in a CIVIL WAR which was predicted by many people before the U.S. invaded Iraq.
>>I think a new four-year governement should be great news in for all Americans.
Why? Simply because it's a new government? The new governenment won't solve the problems.
>>In addition, Nedra Pickler already has an established record of cheap shots at the President (here and here). She's hardly a mouth for "conservative information."
MMFA isn't saying that Pickler is a source of conservative information. It is pointing out how she is wrong on this one case.
Further, your links are pretty silly. Pickler points out that Lance Armstrong is against the war but a friend of Bush, and somehow that is an example of bad reporting? It strikes me as an example of good reporting, of giving the relevant facts.
In the second case, Pickler quoted the president word for word, and this is used as an example of bias? How silly do you get?
To alone take the formation of a 4-year government as a "fundamental change" is to ignore all of the past pronouncements of progress failing to produce meaningful results for most Iraqis. Don't confuse a "symbolism of democracy" for real accomplishments.
This is about the sixth time that the President has touted that Iraq is at a turning point. Eventually, we'll get there, but just because President Bush said it, I'm not going to bank on it.
>> O'DONNELL: Of the many costs of the war is the president's political credibility and his approval among voters. So, Mr. Bush is making a strenuous appeal that the American public see the formation of a new four-year government there as he does: as a fundamental change for Iraq.
Yes, yes he is. Good for him. I mean, I am glad to see our President taking initivate on this matter so soon, before 66% of the nation disapproves of the job he is doing. Before that almost three quarters of the citizens of our nation believe that we are headed in the wrong direction.
To quote Mr. Colbert "This man stands for things, more importantly, he stands on things, like rubble" In this case, the rubble that is his second term agenda.