Time: Wed Dec 17 05:33:55 1997 To: From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: SLS: "Reporters ... NOT Reporting ...." (fwd) Cc: Bcc: sls, friends References: <snip> > >Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 05:20:46 -0500 >From: Mayor Loz <landlord@telerama.lm.com> >Subject: Reporters ... NOT Reporting.... > > >December 17, 1997 > >An open letter to my colleagues > >For nearly 20 years I served as a reporter and editor at daily >newspapers in major markets around the country. As a reporter I've >covered every imaginable story from mass murders to political races. As >the top editor of several daily newspapers, I've supervised hundreds of >other journalists -- some of them good, some of them bad. > >In all my years in the establishment press, I can't think of a single >instance in which a colleague questioned the soundness of my news >judgment. Therefore, I've got wonder: Have I suddenly lost my touch? Or >have my colleagues in the major media lost their nerve? > >I refer to the lack of coverage of one of the most sensational stories >of our time -- the apparent bullet hole found in Commerce Secretary Ron >Brown's skull. > >So far, two highly credible military forensic pathologists involved in >the investigation of Brown's plane crash death last year have come >forward, one the record, to state their conviction that there is an >unexplained, circular wound, characteristic of a gunshot, in Brown's >head. Air Force Lt. Col. Steve Cogswell and Army Lt. Col. David Hause >both agree that Brown should have been autopsied. Remarkably, he was >not. > >Today, after examining the photographic and x-ray evidence, one of the >nation's most prominent forensic pathologists sticks his neck out to >agree with their findings. Dr. Cyril Wecht of Pittsburgh said there was >"more than enough" evidence to suggest possible homicide in Brown's >death to warrant an autopsy. > >"It's not even arguable in the field of medical legal investigations >whether an autopsy should have been conducted on Brown," said Wecht, who >has conducted some 13,000 autopsies himself and reviewed approximately >30,000 others. "I'll wager you can't find a forensic pathologist in >America who will say Brown should not have been autopsied." > >In this case, you can forget political motivations being behind Wecht's >outspokenness. He is a prominent Democrat. > >Meanwhile, as the experts line up behind the unexplained bullet hole >theory, the original explanation of Brown's death is growing more >suspect. Air Force Col. William Gormley, the pathologist who signed off >on the Brown case for the government, has changed his story. After being >confronted with the photographs on a television show, he now renounces >earlier statements suggesting the hole didn't penetrate the skull. Brain >matter is clearly visible in the photographs -- which, strangely, had >been lost by the government. About the missing x-rays and photos, Wecht >joins the suspicious among us. > >"The frequency of lost x-rays, hospital records, documents, autopsy >materials and other materials in a medical-legal investigation is >directly in proportion to the complexity, controversy and external >challenges," he says. He says such losses are "very, very rare" in >normal cases. > >There appears to be nothing normal about the Brown case -- which, you >would think, would add to its newsworthiness. Uh-uh. Not only has the >story been largely ignored by the big papers, some of the nation's >leading reporters have begun dismissing the reports without ever looking >at the evidence. > >Howard Kurtz, the media critic of the Washington Post, cited the Brown >story as one more reason to dismiss prize-winning investigative reporter >Christopher Ruddy's earlier reporting on the death of Vincent Foster. Is >that journalism? Or is that faith? > >I wouldn't have believed my colleagues could be this myopic, this >closed-minded, this trusting of authority if I hadn't seen it happen >over and over and over again in recent years. For certain stories, no >amount of evidence can persuade journalists to question official >government findings. Worse yet, any renegade reporters who do had better >be prepared for an inquisition, ridicule and ostracism. > >Frankly, I consider it to be a badge of honor to be rejected by a >profession that has lost its moral foundation, its curiosity, in fact, >its whole sense of purpose. > >No, it's not me that has lost my news judgment. I got into this business >inspired by the press' role in uncovering the Watergate scandal. Back >then, reporters and editors had no problem questioning government >handouts. What's changed since then? The party in the White House? Is >that all it takes? > >If the press doesn't get on the ball soon, my dear colleagues are going >to owe Richard Nixon a profound and posthumous apology. > > >Joseph Farah is editor of the Internet newspaper WorldNetDaily.com and >executive director of the Western Journalism Center an independent group >of investigative reporters. > >Go to the between the lines archive > <snip>
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail