Joshua,

All good points, I definitely don't disagree that the media was "hoaxed" here. I think this was a legit move by a terror group to do something like this, or so it appears, and in the interest of the news, the photo was put out with the story. The AP DID indeed caveat their story, with the caveat getting more prominent as the day progressed. That said, I'm not the only one who - at first glance - thought that something was very fishy about the soldier. There is a way to run this story without the photo - it's been done before, usually when the media hasn't been able to confirm anything or contact the family members of the soldier in question. That didn't happen here.

So they're not hoaxed, per se, but they weren't totally faultless, either.

As for "tons" of media outlets picking up on this, there are hundreds of instances of this story being picked up by sources - each of them have the ability to slightly edit the stories from the wire services, with notations of doing so. Publications can say that they chose not to run the story with the image for so and so reason.

Josh, I appreciate you not jumping on the bandwagon that's been forming among bloggers to harass more organized media organizations at any turn. Such eagerness sorta cheapens the real criticisms that may often be made. Good job.

This really was a great post, Josh. Wouldn't it be funny if the MSM one day closed up shop--and left bloggers absolutely nothing to talk about?

Happily, capitalism prevents this scenario from ever happening. But I'd still have a good laugh if it did (and then wonder what on earth I'd have to read).

I wonder if reporters will gather around Barbi's Dream House to get her reaction to the kidnapping?

Actually, this was part of a hit new show on Al-Jazeera: "Fundamentalist Bloopers and Practical Jokes."

They captured Osama!

I don't want the MSM to go away either. I'd just like to see them be more honest and balanced in their coverage. They jumped on this like a brave Marine on a hand grenade but they let the SwiftBoatVets story languish unreported for weeks. When was the last time AP ran a story about heroic actions of any military unit or individual?

They file suit to get more of the President's military records but give his challenger a pass on not signing the release to access his records.

They scream because they can't take pictures of coffins returning from Iraq and Afghanistan but they won't cover awards ceremonies for live, heroic soldiers, Marines, airmen or sailors.

I read the original AP story late this morning on Iwon. I accepted it on face value. I saw the picture and didn't twig to the fakery. When some doubt was expressed on the story I went back to see that the story was still there but the pic had been taken down and replaced with generic soldier file photos. It was then taken down entirely and some time later AP (sort of) admitted to being hoaxed.

They fell for it in their eagerness to report bad news because of their political agenda.

Bloggers, many of whom were just hoaxed by the "reports" of Germany forcing women to be prostitutes, should probably tread lightly.

They scream because they can't take pictures of coffins returning from Iraq and Afghanistan but they won't cover awards ceremonies for live, heroic soldiers, Marines, airmen or sailors.

Very good point. IMHO, this is a much stronger criticism than the action figure story. Why does the MSM so rarely report the humanitarian work being done by the coalition--building schools, hospitals, etc.? Is it because they fear they'll look like they're doing the military's PR work for them? Or do such stories not fit with their concept of the war?

Those who want to see good news about Iraq in the media want it for a political agenda, too. I'd like to point out that "good news" is incredibly boring to a journalist because they are being constantly bombarded by it.

Bad news is what journalists go after because bad news is the hardest for the public to get on their own. Want to know who's been heroic in Iraq? Ask the White House or the Pentagon. They'll give you piles of press releases for free. Want to know if there's any bad news in Iraq? Those folks will all say "gee, none that I've heard. And don't listen to the media."

Those who want to see good news about Iraq in the media want it for a political agenda, too.

I agree that most people who complain about the lack of good news have a political agenda, but so what? If the coverage is unbalanced, it's unbalanced.

I'd like to point out that "good news" is incredibly boring to a journalist because they are being constantly bombarded by it.

How are they being "bombarded" by it? I presume you mean that press releases are often written to portray the subject (in this case, the military) in the best possible light? OK, but is it acceptable for journalists to ignore stories they find "boring"? I think not.

Bad news is what journalists go after because bad news is the hardest for the public to get on their own.

No, bad news is what journalists go after because it sells. "If it bleeds, it leads" is the motto of TV news programs all over the Western world.

Want to know who's been heroic in Iraq? Ask the White House or the Pentagon.

Does this argument work in reverse? "Want to know how many casualties we've had in Iraq, ask the Pentagon"? Of course not. If the media wants to claim to be giving a balanced account of Iraq, they must bring both the bad news and the good news on a daily basis.

nice post Josh. i thought that the coverage was fine, and not sensationalized in the way that many in the blogsphere were making it out to be. it just seems to be that in the same way that much of the bloggers critisize MSM for trying to be the post-watergate woodward/bernstein, many of the bloggers want to be the post-rathergate blog that catches a big screw up.

I agree that the media really didn't get hoaxed per se. However I submit that the story fit inot the template that the media uses to frame stories in Iraq. The kidnapping of a US soldier would heve been pure gold for the media to spring into its mantra of quagmire, ever escalating casualties, insurgents are winning, etc.
Kooks around the world make specious claims all the time. Why did the MSM jump on this claim so eagerly? It fits a pattern is all I'm sayin.

Joshua,
Great points. The MSM criticism I would offer isn't of the AP, but of the networks and affiliates (cable and broadcast) that ran the photo with 15-30 seconds of verbage, and no mention of the oddities. As a result, I have coworkers this morning who were still talking about "that new hostage" because they saw a blurb on "a new hostage tape was released" type of story.
These same outlets will now hide behind the AP and not take any responsibility for failing to do any checks of their own, or simply say nothing at all. The world won't end, of course, but it does nothing to foster trust among their consumers.

Okay, folks, go read this and tell me it wouldn't sell. Read the in depth story the local paper did on it and tell me it's not an Audie Murphy type story.

Now, show me an AP story concerning this. I'll also be looking for the AP story when The Medal is awarded. Looking in vain, no doubt.

My agenda is to know what's going on, good and bad. I believe that their agenda is to continue opposing the effort in any way they can. Some reporters are worse than others.

I recently read an AP story about Iraqi ex-pats in Michigan voting. Somehow the daily count of military deaths made it into the story by the third paragraph. I saw a similar story in the last few days that began on one subject and ended the opening sentence with an Iraq body count. Completely unrelated to the story but they worked it in.

There's no agenda at AP? Pull the other one, it plays Mozart.

That must be why people thought Bush had a plastic turkey when he went to Iraq for Thanksgiving in 2003... they figured it was for our plastic action-figure troops:

http://ridingsun.blogspot.com/2005/02/finally-it-all-makes-sense.html