Sunday, March 28, 2004

Spinning war

Spin certainly isn't anything new. Lately I've come to have some doubts about Reuters' reporting. It doesn't seem exactly unbiased. Today's reporting is a fair example.


Reuters

Pakistan forces have retrieved 12 captive government men after smashing an al Qaeda-linked militant den and the troops have agreed to lift a cordon around mud-fortresses that sheltered the Islamic radicals.

The 12 were captured by foreign fighters and their local allies last week at the start of a clash on Pakistan's desolate Afghan border in which more than 100 people were killed and a notorious Uzbek al Qaeda leader seriously wounded.

Two men still held captive would be released later on Sunday, said a tribal elder involved in the negotiation of their freedom.


ABC

Militants linked to Al Qaeda have released 12 Pakistani soldiers they had been holding hostage for almost two weeks.

A total of 14 men were captured at the start of a Pakistani military campaign against hundreds of suspected Al Qaeda militants and their tribal allies in the area.

A tribal leader who was involved in negotiating the release says the two remaining hostages will be freed later.



BBC

Tribal leaders had been trying for days to secure the release of the 12 Pakistani soldiers and two government officials.

The Yargulkhel tribesmen had insisted they would not release the hostages until the army ceased its operation in South Waziristan.

Troops began withdrawing to Wana on Sunday after "destroying dens, searching of homes, taking people into custody and the recovery of gadgets and equipment," Mr Shah said.



Reuters makes it seem as though Pakistani soldiers went in blasting to "retrieve" captives. The other reports make it fairly obvious that having the hostages provided the negotiating room to have the Pak army retreat.

The difference between a rescue mission for POWs and a hostage exchange for demands. Although Reuters does put in the line about two captives and negotiations, so that if you read carefully, at least you question what really happened.



And Juan Cole is adding to my concerns about Reuters:

Reuters is reporting that Kuwaiti papers on Saturday discussed the Friday sermon of Muhammad Baqir al-Muhri, a lieutenant of Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani in that country. Al-Muhri (Mohri) threatened that if key passages of the interim constitution are not amended, Sistani would call for massive street demonstrations against it.

I looked up some Kuwaiti newspapers on line and could not find this report in Arabic, checking both the Saturday and Sunday editions. I think it should be remembered that al-Muhri cannot possibly be in close contact with Sistani, and that there is a tendency for junior clerics to say they are speaking for Sistani when they are not. Earlier reports had said that Sistani does not want to instigate street demonstrations, lest the country fall into chaos.
posted by Juan Cole at 3/28/2004 10:12:38 AM


Sometimes I think news sources are purposely spinning, and sometimes I think they just got lazy. And perhaps competitive - just crank out some headlines, capture the audience. We don't have time to get the truth. And nobody's going to be all that interested in it anyway. Keep moving.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are moderated. There may be some delay before your comment is published. It all depends on how much time M has in the day. But please comment!