Fox News' Wilson, CBS affiliate misrepresented Couric's claims about Fallujah, Anbar
SUMMARY: An article posted on wcbstv.com (the online website of New York CBS affiliate
WCBS-TV) claimed that, during an interview with WCBS, Katie Couric "sa[id] she
has already seen dramatic improvements in the country" and that "incidents [of
violence] in Iraq have gone down dramatically."
Similarly, Fox News' Brian Wilson reported that Couric "says she has seen major
improvements during her visit to Iraq." But Couric was talking about
the city of Fallujah and Anbar province when she
referred to progress, not Iraq as a whole.
A September 5 article -- with the headline, "Couric: 'Real Progress' in Iraq" -- posted on wcbstv.com (the website of New York CBS affiliate WCBS-TV) claimed that, during an interview with WCBS, CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric "sa[id] she has already seen dramatic improvements in the country." However, according to a video clip of the interview posted alongside the article, Couric did not claim that there has been "progress" or "dramatic improvements" in Iraq as a whole. Instead, she said that "real progress" has been made in the city of Fallujah. In addition, the article misquoted Couric, claiming that she said, during the interview, "The incidents [of violence] in Iraq have gone down dramatically." Couric actually said that "the number of violent incidents really in Anbar province -- that's one third of Iraq, which is in the West -- have gone down dramatically." Additionally, on the September 5 edition of Fox News' Special Report, guest host and Fox News Washington bureau chief Brian Wilson reported that Couric "says she has seen major improvements during her visit to Iraq" and misquoted Couric exactly as the wcbstv.com article had done.
From the September 5 wcbstv.com article:
One week before Gen. David Petraeus is expected to give his report on U.S. progress in Iraq, CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric says she has already seen dramatic improvements in the country.
"We hear so much about things going bad, but real progress has been made there in terms of security and stability," Couric said Tuesday. "I mean, obviously, infrastructure problems abound, but Sunnis and U.S. forces are working together. They banded together because they had a common enemy: al Qaeda."
[...]
"The spike in police has really been significant," Couric said. "The incidents in Iraq have gone down dramatically."
However, during Couric's WCBS interview, which previewed her upcoming interview of Gen. David Petraeus, commander of Multi-National Forces in Iraq, Couric asserted: "[H]e [Petraeus] took me to Fallujah, which you know is in Anbar province in Western Iraq, and this is considered a real role model of something working right in Iraq." Couric added: "We hear so much about things going bad, but real progress has been made there in terms of security and stability," referring to Fallujah. She later asserted that "the number of violent incidents really in Anbar province ... have gone down dramatically as well."
As Media Matters for America noted, according to a recently released Government Accountability Office progress report on Iraqi benchmarks, "[i]t is unclear whether sectarian violence in Iraq has decreased." The report also stated that "the average number of daily attacks against civilians remained about the same over the last six months [February to July 2007]."
During the "Political Grapevine" segment of Special Report, Wilson reported that Couric had said "she has seen major improvements during her visit to Iraq" and that "real progress has been made there in terms of security and stability," but he did not mention that she was referring to Fallujah and not Iraq as a whole. He then misquoted Couric exactly as the wcbstv.com article had done, claiming she said, "The incidents [of violence] in Iraq have gone down dramatically":
WILSON: CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric says she has seen major improvements during her visit to Iraq. "We hear so much," she says, "about things going on badly, but real progress has been made there in terms of security and stability."
She said these comments -- made these comments on Tuesday's broadcast. She noted that moderate Sunnis are joining the Iraqi security forces, saying "The spike in police has really been significant. The incidents in Iraq have gone down dramatically."
She said that Fallujah is considered a real role model of something working right in Iraq.
The same day, the Republican National Committee released a research briefing, titled "They Said It! CBS' Katie Couric On Progress In Iraq," highlighting wcbstv.com's characterization of Couric's comments. Several conservative blogs have also cited wcbstv.com's report.
From the interview aired live on the September 4 edition of WCBS-TV's CBS 2 News:
CHRIS WRAGGE (co-anchor): Katie, last night, President Bush made an unexpected trip to Iraq. You had that last night; tonight, it's more of your interview with David Petraeus. Is that correct?
COURIC: That's right, Chris. You know, he took me to Fallujah, which you know is in Anbar province in Western Iraq, and this is considered a real role model of something working right in Iraq. We hear so much about things going bad, but real progress has been made there in terms of security and stability.
I mean, obviously, infrastructure problems abound, but Sunnis and U.S. forces are working together. They banded together because they had a common enemy, Al Qaeda, and now many more people have joined the Iraqi security forces. The spike in police has really been significant since last year and the number of violent incidents really in Anbar province -- that's one third of Iraq, which is in the West -- have gone down dramatically as well, so, General Petraeus took me on a tour of Fallujah and we had a long conversation about a lot of things, about Iraq in general, and he gave me a bit of a preview of what he'll talk about next week to the president and on Capitol Hill.
20,000 groundpounders, per insurgency tactics will secure 800,000 civilians. No doubt they're trying for more and achieving tactical sucess. Its not enough to truly do the job. Three out of 18 markers met politically. This is failure, by our political sock puppets. From the first twich in a neocon's pointy head about Iraq, to the PR surges of today.
Are the three that were met " softballs " ?? like " agree to meet again " ??
- Couric did not claim that there has been "progress" or "dramatic improvements" in Iraq as a whole. Instead, she said that "real progress" has been made in the city of Fallujah - mmfa
- The incidents [of violence] in Iraq have gone down dramatically." Couric actually said that "the number of violent incidents really in Anbar province - mmfa
This is laugh out loud funny...a pathetic whine. mmfa just can't stand success of any kind in Iraq...as evidenced by this inane thread.
Sure, Wesley. The number of civilian deaths are double what they were the previous year. The deaths of US soldiers is up from 169 from the previous summer to over 250 this summer. The government has fallen apart.
But the surge is working. Next, you are going to tell us the WMDs are found in Iraq.
Experts Doubt Drop In Violence in IraqMilitary Statistics Called Into Question
link
Facts are liberally biased, Wes.
Wesley demonstrates that he is as much at fault for the thousands upon thousands of dead in Iraq by supporting and continuing to support Bush's failed war.
Given that you'll probably be too proud to ever ask forgiveness from whatever god you worship, you're probably doomed.
YOU are laugh out loud funny. When we SEE some success in Iraq get back to us. Not some whackamole temporary success here or there. Success in Iraq as a whole.
man oh man! First HRC touts how the current tactics are "working" in Iraq - and now Couric is talking up progress in Iraq.
Iraq has not been handled well by the Bush Admin - but if progress can be made and we can eventually prevail in that part of the world, why is that such bad news to the left/libs?
gee, you're probably right. we all know what a great track record you guys have had in iraq when it comes to predictions.
Did you even read the article?
Let me just repeat: civilian deaths are double what they were last year; soldier fatalities up from 169 to over 250 for the summer; and the Iraqi government in tatters. Not to even mention the horrific bombing last month and the outbreak of cholera.
Oh yes, the surge is working alright.
The funny thing about propaganda is that the people who invent and spread it end up actually believing it.
Iraq has not been handled well by the Bush Admin
You can pick up your "Understatement of the Year" award on your way out.
but if progress can be made and we can eventually prevail in that part of the world, why is that such bad news to the left/libs?
One might have to ask why Bush trashed some of the peace agreements in that region? Why he had to provoke the "axis of evil" and stoke Iran and North Korea's appetite for nuclear (sorry, nookyoolaaaar) weapons? Why did Bush have to invade a country that had done nothing to us, that was fully contained, and harmless to us and its neighbors?
Why was peace such bad news to you regressives? Why is diplomacy a four letter word in the regressive dictionary?
Regressives have set the planet back decades in just seven years. Tragic.
Look, I'm not saying that the USA hasn't gotten its hair mussed up a bit in Iraq. Obviously, we can do better and our current strategy seems to be working.
In terms of our struggle against countries such as North Korea, Iran and other nations that support Islamo-facism, you are free to take sides.
Was Iraq really "contained"? The fact is that the sanctions were collapsing due to bribery and pressure from countries that wanted to do business with Iraq and it's huge oil supplies.
Finally, it is so hypocritical of the left to argue about how great the sanctions were before the Iraq war when it was the left that was crying about how sanctions were killing the children back in the 1990s.
Finally an actual cogent argument. WRONG but an attempt anyway. Yes Iraq had been contained, even Powell and Rice said so.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6456.htm
In Cairo, on February 24 2001, Powell said: "He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours."Two months later, Condoleezza Rice also described a weak, divided and militarily defenceless Iraq. "Saddam does not control the northern part of the country," she said. "We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."
And NO it is NOT hypocritical. The sanctions did not have to be so broad in order to contain his pursuit of WMDs and to the extent international support for sanctions was waning it was for that reason. IF we had made the adjustments there would have been no such waning.
Ok, so I made an argument. Maybe now you might try to meet the argument. I said that the sanctions were, in fact, working while they were in effect. My point is that the support for the sanctions was collapsing and could not have been continued much longer. France and Germany wanted to to trade with Iraq. Iraq was using its oil money to bribe nations at the UN to vote against continuing the sanctions.
So, after the sanctions ended, how long do you think it would have taken Saddam to renew his efforts to obtain WMD and continue his plans to attack other nations in the region?
Or do you think it would have been realistic for the USA to keep its troops camped out in the desert on the border of Iraq to keep Iraq "boxed in"?
Sanctions do break down, eventually. And frankly, all the western powers and their corporate buddies broke the sanctions repeatedly. But this did not help ordinary Iraqis.
When Congress voted to give authority for Bush to use force, SOME of them believed their vote would allow the weapons inspectors back in, which it did. At this point, they discovered that despite Sadam's rhetoric, the WMD's were already destroyed.
This is where a moral U.S. government would have monitored the situation and contained Sadam. Not a pretty situation for sure, and created by the west who supplied him with weapons in the first place. But a better way than invasion and occupation.
S>>o, after the sanctions ended, how long do you think it would have taken Saddam to renew his efforts to obtain WMD and continue his plans to attack other nations in the region?
What plans to attack other nations?
I DID meet the argument. Both by disputing they were breaking down and when I said: The sanctions did not have to be so broad in order to contain his pursuit of WMDs and to the extent international support for sanctions was waning it was for that reason. IF we had made the adjustments there would have been no such waning.
So had we loosened the restrictions NOT military in exchange for new and increased monitering and inspections the less restrictive and damaging sanctions would have continued to garner support. IF Iraq had refused THAT would have strengthened international support for continued sanctions.
>>In terms of our struggle against countries such as North Korea, Iran and other nations that support Islamo-facism, you are free to take sides.
What a nice smear, so typical of the Bush faithful. So if we disagree with Bush, his illegal war, and his lies, we have chosen the side of "Islamo-facism." Nice. By the way, North Korea is secular, so your argument doesn't even make sense.
So now we went to war with Iraq because the sanctions were collapsing? Do you realize how ludicrous that is? First Bush claims that Saddam has a nuclear program and will give WMDs to terrorists, and when both parts of the at statement prove false, his faithful now change the argument to the collapse of the sanctions? So that is why we went into Iraq? It is hard to keep up with the changing rationales for this illegal war.
Ahhhh, liberals. Always the defeatists. They've thrown Katie under the bus to stick to their lock-step mantra......."BUSH IS BAD. IRAQ IS A QUAGMIRE".....makes me pray that Hillary "I had Vince Foster murdered and all I got was this lousy Senate seat" Clinton starts remarking on how well things are going in Iraq. But alas, the party line is "Demonize the Bush administration whenever possible".
and the bush administration serves it right across the plate, don't they? stupidity on steroids.
......."BUSH IS BAD. IRAQ IS A QUAGMIRE".....
Yes and yes. Once the government you are backing is on the edge of collapse and the general public has turned against you. It is pretty much down hill from there, unless your willing to turn to wholesale destruction. If America was invaded I hate to be a foreign soldier, it would be brutal, and I am surprised why anyone thinks any other country would be different. Especially, a country in a region that has been fighting since "Genesis". We were the sight impaired being lead by the blind -- now we are in the middle of traffic, you're shocked? This can not end well -- either we wil lose or what we will have to do to keep from losing will be equally horrible. Here the real choice at this point the surge won't work without enough soldiers which could only be provided by a draft and the draft will not work unless you are willing to inflict a huge amount of damage. So what are you willing to do? And after it is over what will you tell the world after you destoried at least 3 countries and who will trust you?
Yea, Clinton murdered Foster. And you expect to be taken seriously, too.
Who said that Clinton murdered Vince Foster (or anyone else?)
Not me. Unless, of course, you can cite something that I've said.
- j4sonl33 / Thursday September 6, 2007 08:24:51 PM EST
Is it that you can't read, or just won't?
(He's the one who said it. Not you.)
As bittermarv pointed out, it was J4
"makes me pray that Hillary "I had Vince Foster murdere"
But are you now denying that in another thread you said exactly that, that Clinton murdered Vince Foster?
I never said that Vince Foster mas murdered by anyone.
Arguments are fine. But why do people have to make things up, lie and slander?
I hope that Hsu is not silenced before he can tell his story. People who get involved with the Clinton crime family often end up dead.
johnrtorres638 / Saturday September 1, 2007 12:15:25 PM EST
Care to explain yourself?
good catch, fmp; thanks
That was awesome. He called Hillary a murderer and then in the next sentence accused people of 'demonizing' Bush. Maybe this is why the Right is so big on crippling our school system. Better education in this country and they wouldn't get away with anything. You shouldn't be allowed to graduate high school unless you can write an essay correctly explaining what irony is.
AHH the Moronocon warmongers are heard from again. Trying the stupidity of blaming Hillary for a suicide and LYING as is the moronocon staple. We want to get as many Americans killed as we possibly can is the motto of the Moronocons.
Here are a few facts and statistics that we won't hear about on FAUX NOISE.
Katie's report is just more fluff and smoke and mirrors.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14198105
and here,
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14218104
Also be sure to listen to the "All things considered."
Another thing nobody mentions-it is illegal to drive a motor vehicle in Falujah if you are a civilian. Kinda makes the life of the city come to a screeching halt, don't you see. Iraqi's are calling it the "dead city". Brought to you by the GWOT.
This is starting to get so predictable. Somebody says that there is progress being made in Iraq, and this website gets mad.
Progress, eh? Yes some of us are mad that Bush/co is pushing another dog & pony show. And that instead of reading reports from objective sources so many people prefer the fantasy to the reality.
Kool ade drinkers like you are hurting this country and we wish you would wake up and do the hard work required of us all to live in a democracy.
Yes, it is getting predictable. War supporters trying to hype the non-existent hype of the surge get caught lying. MMFA point this out. A right-winger comes on and says "But the surge is working, because the war supporters say it is, and MMFA's pointing out these lies is just proof that the surge is working.
It's called circular reasoning.
Oops. Should read:
Yes, it is getting predictable. War supporters trying to hype the non-existent success of the surge get caught lying. MMFA point this out. A right-winger comes on and says "But the surge is working, because the war supporters say it is, and MMFA's pointing out these lies is just proof that the surge is working."
It's called circular reasoning.
The ultimate irony of this whole situation is the meaningless and triviality of all these sanctimonious, self-rightheous comments when compared to larger things. To the soldier serving in Iraq, these opinions do not amount to a hill of beans. The aim to stay alive, alert, and conduct their missions is light-years beyond anything and everything that ever appears on this site. The second irony is the belief that you can really make a difference or a change by posts like this. You complain, whine, moan, and bellyache about what is so wrong about our country; yet you live in a country that allows you to spout this without penalty. Try getting by with this in Iran, North Korea, Cuba. It's funny too how the target of all the evils of the world is always the U.S. Criticizing U.S. policy is "safe". Nobody has to worry about parting with their heads for criticizing America. However, thank-you MMFA, for my daily dose of comedic relief. :)