“Military: McChrystal Bits Were Off the Record” |
| Military: McChrystal Bits Were Off the Record Posted: 25 Jun 2010 07:04 PM PDT « Previous | Main | Next » June 25, 2010 7:24 PM ABC News' Luis Martinez reports: A senior military official tells ABC News that Rolling Stone broke journalistic ground rules established for the magazine's profile of the general by publishing comments that occurred during what McChrystal's aides thought were off-the-record sessions that would not be reported. The official said the magazine's claim that there were no ground rules for the interview and profile was an "absurd statement." The official says a review of events has found no ground rules for the article in writing, but the official is confident that many of the attention-grabbing comments made by McChrystal staffers were made in what they thought were off-the-record discussions. The review found Rolling Stone reporter Michael Hastings conducted "several one-on-one interviews -- some of those were on background and others were on the record." Hastings also was allowed access to other sessions that "were off-the-record and intended to give him a sense" of how McChrystal's team worked together. The official says no evidence has been found to suggest that the most "salacious political quotes were from any of these one-on-one interviews. They all appear to have been in settings that were off the record." In an interview conducted this afternoon by the Washington Post, Rolling Stone magazine's executive editor Eric Bates says no ground rules were broken. "A lot of things were said off the record that we didn't use," Bates says. "We abided by all the ground rules in every instance. In every case in this story, there were multiple times in which there were express requests for off-the-record and background or not-for-attribution and we abided in every instance." The senior military official says that Rolling Stone is incorrect in stating that the magazine sent McChrystal's staff an advance draft of the story, sending instead a list of 30 questions compiled by a researcher who was fact-checking Hastings' article. Those questions, says the official, did not "come close to revealing what ended up in the final article." A copy of that e-mail obtained by ABC News shows the submitted questions requested confirmation of details such as whether McChrystal's staff had a "full-scale operations center" set up in the Hotel Westminster during their visit to Paris this past April. "Yes" came the reply from McChrystal press aide Duncan Boothby, who had set up the interview and resigned his post in the wake of the controversy surrounding the article. He added. "Not sure, I'd call it full scale, but everywhere we go we have capability for immediate comms." A key moment in the Rolling Stone article is when Hastings described how McChrystal and President Obama had failed to connect on a personal level from the outset. Hastings went on to describe a description provided by aides of McChrystal's first meeting with Obama where he "didn't seem very engaged." Hastings' description of McChrystal's relationship with Obama begins with the mention that McChrystal had voted for Obama. According to the researcher's questions, that information came from McChrystal himself. In his reply, Boothby requests that piece of information not be included in the article because it would present an undue command influence. Boothby replies: "Important – Please do not include this. This is personal and private information and unrealtd (sic) to his job. It would be inappropriate to share. My reason for this is it would present an undue command inflluence (sic) on junior officers or soldiers who should make their own political decisions. There are very strict rules in the military on separating church and state on this sort of stuff – Have to keep out of political preference and personal choice." - Luis Martinez * This blog entry has been updated with Bates' comments. June 25, 2010 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (16) Both the Iraq and Afghan wars are unconstitutional because Congress never declared war. A truly patriotic officer would have resigned his commission in protest against these wars by presidential dictators. That's the real fault with McChrystal, Petraeus, and the others. Posted by: John Seiler | Jun 25, 2010 10:15:03 PM General McCrystal is a national treasure, who tried to win the war w/o resolving to destruction and mass killing. A leader who fought with his troops, a great character who dares to question his inexperienced boss than to blindly submit, if this not a great American spirit, I don't know what else. God would never put a good man down. Posted by: Digital88 | Jun 25, 2010 10:10:50 PM I'm stunned at the people commenting here asking if we are surprised at RS doing a hit piece. You know what I was surprised about? A 4 star general giving ANY reporter this kind of access, much less one from the RS. I feel bad that a seemingly good man has lost his career but at the end of the day, he brought this upon himself. My personal feeling is his ego was trying to be the "cool guy" being interviewed by the RS. Posted by: Cheryl | Jun 25, 2010 9:57:37 PM It's a conspiracy, I tell ya. (yawn) Posted by: Aaron | Jun 25, 2010 9:49:37 PM There seems to be some conservative backlash against rolling stone. I don't agree. First and foremost McCrystal defiled one of the nine principals of war; unity of command. There is no grey area here. Fortunately for the soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen RS was in a position to expose this. Good for them. If you can't uphold principals published in DoD Joint Doctrine as a General Officer then you are clearly not the man for the job. McCrystal knows this and disregarded anyway. What other principals of war did McCrystal disregard? How many of our brave men and women have died because of his incompetence? Give the men and women of our armed forces some leadership that can do at minimum, what they were put there to do. Follow orders! Posted by: Eric P | Jun 25, 2010 9:42:32 PM They set out to do a hit piece and they accomplished it. For some reason they never saw the need to uncover the 'real' Obama when they wrote about him. Posted by: Ferrari5555 | Jun 25, 2010 9:35:35 PM Seems like the only thing McChrystal is guilty of is voting for Obama and being a soldier. The fact that Obama fired him over this article shows he cares more about his image than he does about results. Obama couldn't figure out that the comments were made third hand off the record? He could if he wanted to. Dope and change. Posted by: Ivan | Jun 25, 2010 9:30:41 PM RS is simply a rag that I will not read...not that I ever have, but you haveto be somewhat of a slimeball to be a good reporter anyway...kinda like a lawyer. The only mistake was letting scum like that RS reporter in the same presence as our heroes in uniform. Posted by: chris | Jun 25, 2010 9:28:06 PM He said what he said, he thought what he thought, and - more importantly - even before this article he had estranged many of America's allies. Some of you who love authority figures so much, with no real knowledge of the man, seem to have serious daddy issues. Posted by: Mark | Jun 25, 2010 9:16:47 PM Mcchrystal did not operate like anything but a primadonna. His and his staff's arrogance is apparent in allowing this reporter such access. They seem to truly believe they could do no wrong. I say good riddance Stan m. Posted by: LTR | Jun 25, 2010 9:09:40 PM Two people have lost their jobs over this. Is everyone at RS still employed? They should be ashamed of themselves, having ruined respected careers. From the start, I was surprised at the supposed candor of McChrystal. Someone of his rank knows better. I find it questionable that he and more than one staffer made such candid comments. It is highly unlikely all of them would be that foolish. RS lost what little credibility they had. The have done a disservice to all reporters who might attempt to interview members of the military in the future. Front line access? Doubt it. After this, all branches should refer media requests to the WH since they know so much about military operations. Posted by: Lagunatrimom | Jun 25, 2010 8:48:03 PM Seriously, if Rolling Stone magazine is over there, with unfettered access to top brass.. why not have a Better Homes and Garden story on how to decorate your tent? Popular mechanics on IEDs? An "O" magazine spread on depression while deployed? How 'bout Emeril on combat cooking?....talk about "BAM!!" I mean, what the heck is going on over there? Posted by: cindy | Jun 25, 2010 8:42:30 PM If McChrystal trusted leftist reporters then he had it coming. Who else would have this silly man have trusted, Obama? Posted by: CLN | Jun 25, 2010 8:13:35 PM Well, let's see. The Beltway lapdog press generally says "off the record until you say on" but they teach you in journalism school it's "on the record until I agree to go off the record." See the difference? Posted by: Susie Madrak | Jun 25, 2010 7:48:53 PM So is anyone really surprised that RS set out to do a hit piece and duped McChrystal and his aides? Come on man...its a left wing rag, what the hell else did you expect? Posted by: Bruce R | Jun 25, 2010 7:43:52 PM Gee, wouldn't it have been nice if any of this had been investigated beforehand? I'm totally disgusted with this reporter and the administration for acting like spoiled school children. I don't agree with McChrystal on many things, but a brilliant career was torpedoed by a glory hound reporter and a diva president. And yet, we still hear the press scream if they don't have access wherever they want to go. Geraldo sits there and draws out maps on the ground where troops are, against regulations. Hastings gets his career bumping story at the cost of lives and careers. Military people ought to just decline to be around reporters or keep their mouths shut if one is forced on them. Posted by: JMW | Jun 25, 2010 7:41:46 PM Post a comment Five Filters featured article: Headshot - Propaganda, State Religion and the Attack On the Gaza Peace Flotilla. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Content Keyword RSS To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 comments:
Post a Comment