By Richard Benedetto, retired USA Today White House correspondent and columnist  The lack of historical memory among much of the U.S. press corps that covered President Obama's trip to Europe is nothing short of embarrassing. Reporters who breathlessly followed the president as he and Mrs. Obama glamorously barnstormed from Britain to France to Germany to the Czech Republic to Turkey seemed so bent on drawing contrasts between the style and words of Obama and his predecessor, George W. Bush, that they failed to point out the many similarities, particularly the similarities in language, not to mention policy. One illustrative example was Obama's speech before the Turkish Grand National Assembly in Ankara where most reporters saw the biggest news coming out was Obama's declaration that the United States "is not and never will be at war with Islam."
The phrase was headlined everywhere as a major departure from the bellicose Bush, or as some reports called it, "an olive branch" to the Muslim world.
But one fact was missing from most news stories that would have given them some historical context: Bush said the same thing many times before.
True, his words might have fallen on deaf ears for a lot of reasons. But nonetheless, Bush went out of his way on several major occasions to try to assure Muslins that their religion was not the enemy. You would never know it from the current reporting.
The Associated Press dispatch on the speech, which was probably carried by the vast majority of newspapers in the United States, made no mention of Bush having repeatedly said it before. Neither did most TV reports, which are the main source of news to most Americans.
The New York Times quoted the Obama line in its first paragraph, but also made no mention of Bush having used similar words.
To its credit, the Washington Post provided some context by reporting, "Obama's message to Muslims echoed President George W. Bush, who frequently praised Islam as a religion of peace and humanitarian values that had been distorted by extremists who killed in its name."
The Post went on to add, " But Bush's invasion of Iraq, imprisonment of Muslims at Guantanamo Bay, isolation of Iran, and support for Israel in its relations with the Palestinians and in the war with Hezbollah made many in Islamic nations believe that his administration was hostile to their religion."
That is context in reporting. Lending the impression that Obama said it first, is not.
Just what did Bush say about the U.S. not being at war with Islam?
- As far back as Sept. 20, 2001, a little more than a week after the 9-11 attacks, Bush, in a speech before Congress, said, "The enemy of America is not our many Muslim friends; it is not our many Arab friends. Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists and every government that supports them."
- On Sept. 18, 2006, the same AP that failed to mention the similarities between Obama's and Bush's words in Turkey reported, "President Bush tried to quell anti-Americanism in the Middle East yesterday by assuring Muslims that he is not waging war against Islam, regardless of what 'propaganda and conspiracy theories' they hear.
Bush was speaking to the United Nations General Assembly, so it was not some obscure forum. The AP dispatch went on to say that Bush's speech was "less confrontational and aimed at building bridges with people in the Middle East angry with the United States."
While the reporting implied that Bush had ignored, or at least gave short shrift to U.S. relations with Turkey, a NATO ally, the two countries have been quietly cooperating in a number of economic and military areas over the past eight years.
Much was made of Obama's support for Turkey joining the European Union. Bush backed that, too. And as recently as last November, with Bush in his final months of office, the U.S. was providing air and satellite intelligence to the Turkish army to aid in the location and eradication of Kurdish terrorist groups operating in southeastern Turkey and northern Iraq. Turkish officials praised Bush for his cooperation. The policy apparently is continuing under Obama.
So far, it would appear the key difference between Obama and Bush policy toward Turkey is that Obama is willing to be much more public and visible about it than his predecessor. That, and the fact that he has Muslim roots, suggest that he might have more credibility with the Turkish people, a definite plus.
As a longtime reporter now teaching budding journalists, communications specialists and government officials, I stress the importance of historical context in reporting, making sure reports do not lend the false impression that something is happening either in a vacuum, or has never happened before. Sadly, many of my colleagues in the news business seem to be so caught up in hype and drama that they ignore the facts because it might upset a good narrative . in this case that Obama is so different from Bush. That's not reporting, it's misleading the public. And that's not a trend we can be proud of. Richard Benedetto is a retired USA Today White House correspondent and columnist. He now teaches journalism and politics at American and Georgetown universities in Washington, D.C.
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
"The political aspect of the Michael Jackson interview is that it was aired on the very same day and at the very same time that Larry King spent an entire hour interviewing former President, Bill Clinton. Was that a coincidence? Is the fact that the mainstream media spent more time promoting the suggestion that Michael Jackson is nothing more than a freak, than covering an interview with the former President of the United States, a mere coincidence? In business, the media and any other, worthwhile endeavor, timing is everything, and it would be quite naive to think that it was just a coincidence. "
You can read the entire article here:
http://surftofind.com/disgrace