Why Corrections Need to Be on A1 Above the Fold

This picture is Exhibit A of what happens when hyperventallating anti-US reporting outruns the facts at "objective" news outlets - they end up printing propaganda for the enemy. As the old saw goes, truth is the first casualty in war (especially within the press).

The ever-vigilant Michelle Malkin has been following the propagation and dissemination of a dishonest smear attempt an "editorial oversight" that has been popping up in media outlets all over the world. The UK Times ran a photo (an AP photo and caption) showing Iraqi civilians bound and shot in a long row about two weeks ago. The paper incorrectly captioned them as victims of Haditha, while attributing the killings to the US Marines. In reality, the photo was taken months before the Haditha incident even took place, and the people were killed by Islamic terrorists (in typical Islamist fashion, might I add). All of this must be done keeping in mind that not a single charge has been filied against any US soldier in these incidents.

Not a big deal, you say? Bollocks. The UK Times has issued a retraction and apology - and...? The picture, already making its way with phony caption around the world time and again, became fodder for a leftwingnut political cartoonist for the Chicago Sun-Times, who was also forced to issue a retreaction (post-publication, so that the damage was already done). Terrorist news network Al-Jazeera also picked up the photo and broadcast it across their airwaves and on their website. The "echo chamber" of the anti-war press in effect:

More on the now established mainstream press tactic pattern of "smear first, ask / verify/ contextualize/ fact-check later" here. We are now seeing the mask come off the press, who collectively think that they are re-living 1968 all over again (aka, they want another US loss and failure). This ain't 1968, and if it weren't for fact checkers on the Internet, this vicious smear attempt would continue to be blasted nightly over cute little chirons and customized Haditha graphics at CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, TOday Show, MSNBC, the NYT, etc.

Given that the individuals in this photo are killed in typical Islamist fashion (civilians used to make an example out of them, bound, blindfolded, shot in cold blood, dumped in the street, etc.), it begs a set of questions about left-wing conventional wisdom. If these kinds of atrocities were being committed en masse by our troops as alleged by anti-warbots on a daily basis, then why are there so very few of these incidents that are reported? Why is the first instance in the entire conflict of such "alleged war crimes" so badly reported and so grossly blown out of historical and practical context? Could it be that the press has been chomping at the bit to get stories like this? Could it be that the US military, acting in the restrained and professional matter in which it always has, has been doing a nearly impeccable job of controlling and limiting civilian casualties and "alleged cold-blooded massacres?"

Where are the A1 corrections - above the fold in 36 point Times New Roman? Retractions and apoligies are lovely, but again, the damage to the troops is done whether the picture has anything to do with them or not (and it doesn't). I'll leave the readers and old media devotees to figure this one out, as their favored information sources backpedal, retract, misreport and misinform them.

Cross-posted at The Jawa Report.