POL: Misleading AP Headline.

[Dutch]

Bush: I won't change strategy in Iraq
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061021/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq

WASHINGTON - President Bush conceded Friday that "right now it's tough" for American forces in Iraq, but the White House said he would not change U.S. strategy in the face of pre-election polls that show voters are upset.

The AP fails to accurately back up with quotes what they blast Bush for saying. And it's clearly off the mark as far as portraying the body of the article.

"We are constantly adjusting our tactics so that we achieve the objective, and right now it's tough, it's tough," Bush said in an Associated Press interview.

Despite calls for change, Bush said, "Our goal has not changed. Our goal is a country that can defend, sustain and govern itself, a country that which will serve as an ally in this war. Our tactics are adjusting."

The related video goes into a lot of detail that is simply left out of this article. Missing. Erased from the article. The speech that the AP links to this article doesn't once say anything about "I won't change strategy in Iraq". In fact, the video damned near contradicts itself with the title "Bush to consider change in Tactics." And that is quesitonable as we know that the tacticical strategy is evolving and Bush mentions that military commanders are changing tactics to meet new theats. So despite what I think, or what you think, isn't the AP's job to report the news with some accuracy and let us decide?

I am not satisfied that the AP is giving us accurate headlines, I think they are coming to their own conclusions regardless of the information. And to me, that's a bit dangerous and careless of them.

I hope any responses are about the thread and not personal attacks or insults against me. Issues like Iraq, while in bad shapre right now, are important to me, and I hope we aren't painting ourselves into a corner that forces the American public to demand a full and immediate retreat without fair debate. And the AP, whether they want to or not, is leading the charge on providing us the information we crave in order to have that debate. I simply believe they should be doing a much better job.

[Axxon]

Dutch, you suck. Ok, come on, you asked for it. ;)

I see where you're coming from and I'm sure it may appear that way but I've always viewed ( roughly ) strategy to be the overarching achievement of a goal and tactics to be the more day to day detail of achieving the strategic goal and it seems that this is what Bush was saying by reading what you typed.

The goal is the same but the way of implementing it has to change and I don't think anyone could argue with this.

Also, I don't think this is the best time to try and rethink the strategy either. That's going to have to be the priority of whoever wins in 2008 though and that's where the real battleground of ideas needs to be fought not with the president trying to win political points and making the situation even worse. Gotta hand this one to him.

[cartman]

How about this quote from the article:

Presidential spokesman Tony Snow said that while Bush might change tactics, he would not change his overall strategy.

A quote from Bush's spokesman seems to directly backup the headline. I'm not sure how you can say that the headline is "blasting Bush" when they are using a quote from his spokesperson.

[yabanci]

How about this quote from the article:

Presidential spokesman Tony Snow said that while Bush might change tactics, he would not change his overall strategy.

A quote from Bush's spokesman seems to directly backup the headline. I'm not sure how you can say that the headline is "blasting Bush" when they are using a quote from his spokesperson.

I am not satisfied that Tony Snow is giving us accurate headlines, I think he is coming to his own conclusions regardless of the information. And to me, that's a bit dangerous and careless of him.

[Dutch]

How about this quote from the article:



A quote from Bush's spokesman seems to directly backup the headline. I'm not sure how you can say that the headline is "blasting Bush" when they are using a quote from his spokesperson.


That's a fair response. However, if you pay attention, the head-line says "Bush: I won't change stragegy" which leads you to believe Bush will be quoted as saying that in the article. He does not. In fact, he says the tactics are changing to meet new tactics but the overall goal remains the same.

What you are referring to is the AP's interpetation of Tony Snow saying "He isn't jumpy because of the polls" which is the Tony Snow quote used immediately following what you are referring to--to back up the AP's interpretation in the article.

[CraigSca]

I admit - I ws confused by the articles last night. On one hand, Bush brought (or is bringing) the generals in to discuss strategy, and then quickly thereafter articles state: "I'm not changing strategy." I was wondering - why bring the generals in if nothing will change?

[Dutch]

Dutch, you suck. Ok, come on, you asked for it. ;)

I see where you're coming from and I'm sure it may appear that way but I've always viewed ( roughly ) strategy to be the overarching achievement of a goal and tactics to be the more day to day detail of achieving the strategic goal and it seems that this is what Bush was saying by reading what you typed.

The goal is the same but the way of implementing it has to change and I don't think anyone could argue with this.

Also, I don't think this is the best time to try and rethink the strategy either. That's going to have to be the priority of whoever wins in 2008 though and that's where the real battleground of ideas needs to be fought not with the president trying to win political points and making the situation even worse. Gotta hand this one to him.

I'm a glutton for this sort of stuff, I guess, I am actually trying not to comment too much on the political stuff (trying not to is subject to interpretation) since I usually just get gang tackled by my POL: opposites. :)

If Bush says he isn't backing down from the overall goal but is certainly willing to change tactics to meet that goal, that's showing he's not quite as rigid and hardline as "I won't change strategy" which first of all, he never said that, and second of all, misleads the reader into giving an opposite portrayal of what he was saying.

[cartman]

That's a fair response. However, if you pay attention, the head-line says "Bush: I won't change stragegy" which leads you to believe Bush will be quoted as saying that in the article. He does not. In fact, he says the tactics are changing to meet new tactics but the overall goal remains the same.

What you are referring to is the AP's interpetation of Tony Snow saying "He isn't jumpy because of the polls" which is the Tony Snow quote used immediately following what you are referring to--to back up the AP's interpretation in the article.

My interpretation is pretty much the same as AP's after reading the transcript from Snow's briefing:

hxxp://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061020-5.html

There isn't anything easily quotable from the briefing, so that is why there isn't a direct quote from snow outside of the snip that was included in the article. He pretty much comes out and states that Bush is not going to change the strategy. It then devolves into a semantics battle between the meanings of tactics vs. strategy, but the transcript shows the headline is far from being misleading.

As for the headline, since "I won't change strategy in Iraq" wasn't in quotes, it can be attributed to a spokesperson, as it was in this case. Since Tony Snow is the WH Spokesperson, he has the authority to speak for the President.

[JPhillips]

This is the nature of headlines. The writer of the story doesn't write the headline. The editor who writes the headline is looking for the most eyecatching wording he can find. You can find poor or misleading headlines in every newspaper in America every day.

Its not a conspiracy, its just poor writing.

[JPhillips]

Also, I don't think this is the best time to try and rethink the strategy either. That's going to have to be the priority of whoever wins in 2008 though and that's where the real battleground of ideas needs to be fought not with the president trying to win political points and making the situation even worse. Gotta hand this one to him.

We can't wait two years. The situation is deteriorating at such a rapid pace that in two years we may have already lost. Did you see where Sadr's militia took over a town in southern Iraq? Morally we also can't allow good men and women to die because we're afraid of of scoring or losing policital points.

We need some leadership.

[Dutch]

You can find poor or misleading headlines in every newspaper in America every day. Its not a conspiracy, its just poor writing.

That was kind of my point.

And the AP, whether they want to or not, is leading the charge on providing us the information we crave in order to have that debate. I simply believe they should be doing a much better job.

[Toddzilla]

I am not satisfied that Tony Snow is giving us accurate headlines, I think he is coming to his own conclusions regardless of the information. And to me, that's a bit dangerous and careless of him.And behind the counter of a Dairy Queen somehwere in middle America, Scotty McClellan laughs quitely to himself....

[Dutch]

My interpretation is pretty much the same as AP's after reading the transcript from Snow's briefing:

hxxp://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061020-5.html

There isn't anything easily quotable from the briefing, so that is why there isn't a direct quote from snow outside of the snip that was included in the article. He pretty much comes out and states that Bush is not going to change the strategy. It then devolves into a semantics battle between the meanings of tactics vs. strategy, but the transcript shows the headline is far from being misleading.

As for the headline, since "I won't change strategy in Iraq" wasn't in quotes, it can be attributed to a spokesperson, as it was in this case. Since Tony Snow is the WH Spokesperson, he has the authority to speak for the President.

You're right, it does dissolve into a semantics battle. And Bush ('s spokesman) was pretty adamant that the strategy is not what the journalists were takling about. He says what they were referring to was tactics, not strategy. Yet, who is Tony Snow to know what he or the President really said, when the journalist can simply disagree with what they think and say and come out with "BUSH: I WILL NOT CHANGE STRATEGY".

You have to admit, that after that exchange over semantics, it's pretty damned misleading of the AP to lead with that headline.

Whether it be for liberal or corporate bias, I say they were way off th mark with there assumptions. And let's face it, 99% of the people reading that headline never got to your link describing the interview with Tony Snow that clarifies it. It's just another drop in the bucket for some of us, whether we care about it's accuracies or not.

[Dutch]

As for the headline, since "I won't change strategy in Iraq" wasn't in quotes, it can be attributed to a spokesperson, as it was in this case. Since Tony Snow is the WH Spokesperson, he has the authority to speak for the President.

I'm sure technically and legally it can be attributed to the President.

But to further add to the illusion, the picture on the web page is of President Bush speaking, not Tony Snow.

Bush: I won't change strategy in Iraq
By DEB RIECHMANN and KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press Writers
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061021/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq;_ylt=AsYegAhi6VJJ7.UYi6OnHous0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20061020/capt.af15f6a5ae4745b1aa7ba140357cfc1e.bush_whcd107.jpg?x=180&y=129&sig=3Fo5bxwfbFj3.SBOlUREyw--

[Toddzilla]

How dare they - in an article about the President - use a picture of the President.

[Dutch]

How dare they - in an article about the President - use a picture of the President.

I guess I'm not being articulate enough for some. Perhaps I'd make a great journalist. :)

[JPhillips]

Dutch: First I'll readily agree that this was a bad headline. However, you seem to be under the impression that the headline is primarily there to accurately summarize the article. It's not. The headline is about marketing first and foremost. If the headline gets you to read the story its done its job. Now I'll agree that headlines should also be as accurate as possible, but accuracy has very little to do with their purpose.

In effect you're arguing that sometimes commercials are misleading.

[flere-imsaho]

I don't think the headline is misleading. Bush has repeatedly said that his goal and his strategy go hand-in-hand, and that neither will change, while at the same time he's said that tactics on the ground can change.

I think you're just pissed at the AP because they're continuing to deliver the same message Bush has delivered ever since he started this war, and you're hoping that he was becoming more nuanced about it. But the AP can only report the facts, and the facts are that Bush hasn't decided to change strategy.

[Dutch]

Dutch: First I'll readily agree that this was a bad headline. However, you seem to be under the impression that the headline is primarily there to accurately summarize the article. It's not. The headline is about marketing first and foremost. If the headline gets you to read the story its done its job. Now I'll agree that headlines should also be as accurate as possible, but accuracy has very little to do with their purpose.

In effect you're arguing that sometimes commercials are misleading.

I tend to agree with everything you say (and I think that's progress from a year ago for your side of the debate), except your the last point.

If all the commercials said Coke was great and Pepsi sucks, I would agree with that. In the commercial corporate world, Coke and Pepsi both get to talk about how great they are and how much their alternative sucks. But in the world of AP journalism (which I think is still the American standard for respectable journalism) and their articles they present to the world, Coke is generally great and Pepsi generally sucks. That's not commercialism, that's an infomercial.

[JPhillips]

You seemed to be arguing earlier that you weren't looking at this as political bias, but clearly you are. There we will always part ways.