Culled from CJR’s frequently updated “Must-reads from around the Web,” our staff recommendations for the best pieces of journalism (and other miscellany) on the Internet, here are your can’t-miss must-reads of the past week:
A loss in the family — James Gandolfini changed television, and us
Missing Michael Hastings — One of the great reporters of his generation died Tuesday at 33. The stories he wrote, and the ones he didn’t live to write
Michael Hastings in Baghdad — The reporter died Tuesday morning at 33. His friend and bureau chief remembers an era that shaped him
Michael Hastings: my friend and his enemies — Hastings was fearless and shook things up - especially with his McChrystal expose. The haters in the media couldn’t forgive him
Scrubbed — The world of black-ops reputation management
In the Newtown clerk’s office, a dishonorable end to six months of lawlessness — Must-read for anyone who cares about public records access
I was paid $12.50 an hour to write this story — I think it’s worth more, and I would have done it for less
Persuading David Simon — The people who run the American security apparatus are in the overwhelming majority diligent people with a deep concern for civil liberties. But their job is to find creative ways to collect information. And they work within an institution that, because of its secrecy, is fundamentally inimical to democracy and to a free society
Have you seen this column? — The disappearance of ‘Sports of the Times’
‘What part of “Politico” do you not understand?’ — A conversation about the dark art of driving the conversation
"In its obituary for the journalist [Michael Hastings]... the New York Times toed a line peddled by the government at the time of the McChrystal scandal by casting some doubt on Hastings’ reporting. The journalist’s widow, Elise Jordan, has been swift to take issue with the Times obit."
-- Natasha Lennard, Salon.com (June 20, 2013)
. . .
In his April 2011 piece, “Pentagon Inquiry Into Article Clears McChrystal and Aides,” the Pentagon’s New York Time reporter Thom Shanker wrote that the DoD investigation had “found no proof of wrongdoing by the general,” “were unable to confirm the events as reported in the June 2010 article in “Rolling Stone,” and “challenged the accuracy of the profile of General McChrystal” written by Michael Hastings.
In his 2012 book “The Operators” Michael Hastings responded to his critics: ”The investigation reads comically. It is the last whitewash of McChrystal’s military career. … Pentagon officials would privately tell journalists that the intent of the investigation wasn’t even to find wrongdoing; it was to “damage” my credibility.”
In an interview Hastings was asked the question: “are there individual reporters whom you want to call out publicly for their sort of following the Pentagon line and not doing their job?” He replied, “Yeah. I saw a pretty egregious example with the New York Times Pentagon correspondent [Thom Shanker] who literally just published the Pentagon spokesperson's anonymous quotes when he was reporting on my stories. And he didn't bother to call Rolling Stone for a comment, of course, because, well, he's got the official line from the Pentagon.”
#1 Posted by Guy Montag, CJR on Fri 21 Jun 2013 at 08:05 PM
It’s worth noting that Shanker also previously whitewashed Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s key role in the cover-up of Pat Tillman’s 2004 friendly-fire death in Afghanistan. In May 2009, President Obama nominated McChrystal to be his new commander of the Afghan War. Conveniently, just before McChrystal’s June 2009 Senate confirmation, the NYT’s published Thom Shanker’s piece, “Nomination of U.S. Afghan Commander Revives Questions in Tillman Case” supposedly “exonerating” McChrystal of all ‘wrongdoing.” Although Shanker’s article was full of official government-approved “facts,” he ignored clear evidence of McChrystal‘s central role in the cover-up [for details, see the posts "Something to Die For," “The [Untold] Tillman Story,” and "Lies Borne Out by Facts, If Not the Truth" at the Feral Firefighter blog].
The evening after his Senate confirmation, McChrystal gave Shanker (& fellow NYT reporter Eric Schmitt) a private tour of his new Pentagon HQ! A few months later, Shanker became a "writer in residence" at the think-tank CNAS which worked closely with McChrystal on the Afghan War “surge, ” and CNAS hosted his book release party in 2011. Isn’t “access” a grand thing!
#2 Posted by Guy Montag, CJR on Fri 21 Jun 2013 at 08:07 PM
I didn’t come away from my personal experience with Thom Shanker & the NYT with any confidence in our “watchdog” media. As Hastings said, “they call it the Pentagon Press Corps, right? And you sort of think, oh, well it means the people who kind of watch over the Pentagon and perform the media's watchdog function, but no, it's an extension of the Pentagon.”
Once again, with their obituary of Michael Hastings (as with their coverage of the Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman story) the NYT’s reporting has lacked journalistic integrity (“it’s not The Times that is questioning the article’s accuracy; it was the Defense Department. We're simply reporting what it publicly said”). So, instead of a search for the truth, the NYT’s has once again displayed its stenographic ability to parrot the official government position “borne out by facts, if not the truth.” Not just stenography, but stenography in the service of smearing a real journalist after his tragic, early death!
#3 Posted by Guy Montag, CJR on Fri 21 Jun 2013 at 08:08 PM
McChrystal ended his 2013 memoir [see the post "Never Shall I Fail My Comrades" at the Feral Firefighter blog] with a brief, disingenuous discussion of the “Rolling Stone” profile which led to his firing by President Obama. Although McChrystal claims he “took full responsibility” (neglecting to mention his PR guru Duncan Boothby fell on his sword) he also blamed Michael Hastings for his supposed lack of fairness and accuracy. However, it's worth noting that McChrystal has dodged, repeatedly refusing to confirm or deny the accuracy of Hasting’s quotes when questioned by reporters. Why? Probably because he knows Hasting's has many of the quotes on audiotape.
Since the NYT has persisted in smearing Michael's credibility even in their obituary, why shouldn’t his widow Elise Jordan release the tapes to clear Michael’s journalistic reputation? (and stick it to McChrystal and the NYT!). I hope that she decides to posthumously publish Michael Hasting's transcripts (and release the audiotapes) of his interviews with "Team America" & General McChrystal.
#4 Posted by Guy Montag, CJR on Fri 21 Jun 2013 at 08:09 PM
I’ll miss Michael’s honest, no BS reporting that is sadly lacking among the stenographic mainstream press.
A few days ago, “The American Conservative” (and antiwar.com) reporter Kelly Vahlos ended her eulogy, “Michael Hastings, Truthteller, Dead at 33,” by writing: “Hastings was lambasted by the establishment hive for supposedly “breaking the rules,” which meant he did his job … I believe his book is one of the few “must reads” to come out of the war reportage in that it rankled the powerful while keeping faith with the people, and that’s real journalism. That is why he became a correspondent and why he will be forever remembered as a truthteller. To say he will be missed would be a gross understatement. We are losing so much.”
#5 Posted by Guy Montag, CJR on Fri 21 Jun 2013 at 08:10 PM
Last year, Kelly Vahlos also wrote a touching tribute (“Carl Prine’s Line of Departure”) to another iconoclastic blogger/reporter who has been sidelined by migraines he got from IED hits in Anbar. She wrote:
“he is “one of the good guys, a veteran who obviously loves the military for what it could be and loathes it for what it has been used for… He’s not been right about absolutely everything … and sometimes I think he could go easier on other writers [a reference to Michael Hastings], especially when they have their hearts and heads in the right place. … But he’s always consistent when it counts — in his loyalty to the rank and file and exposing the corruption of power. And that makes him tops with me … because there aren’t a lot of veteran-journalist-critics with his talent willing to write the things he does” [One of Carl’s last columns, “McChrystal Clear” was a caustic review of McChrystal’s road show; see the post “Never Shall I Fail My Comrades” for an archived copy].
#6 Posted by Guy Montag, CJR on Fri 21 Jun 2013 at 08:12 PM
Finally, last year Kelly Vahlos ended her review (“Michael Hastings vs. Team America”) of his 2012 book ”The Operators” on a melancholy note:
“The predominant feeling … is not outrage, nor gleeful satisfaction in seeing everything one suspects about this rotten war confirmed in tawdry black and white detail and in the rise and fall of one of the most celebrated generals in a generation. The overwhelming feeling is, well, sadness. … sadly familiar: a million film plots of mortal men who flew too high and came down with a crash. The rest … — is just plain sad.”
As his Michael’s untimely death.
#7 Posted by Guy Montag, CJR on Fri 21 Jun 2013 at 08:13 PM
"The people who run the American security apparatus are in the overwhelming majority diligent people with a deep concern for civil liberties."
Said no honest, well-informed adult, ever.
#8 Posted by Dan A., CJR on Sun 23 Jun 2013 at 04:48 PM