NYTimes & war propaganda

[Doug Millison]

If that is Pynchon talking to Playboy Japan, expressing his disappointment
in the Times' coverage of the war, then this might be on-topic:



                                 FAIR-L
                    Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting
               Media analysis, critiques and news reports





ACTION ALERT:
NYT Buries Story of Airstrikes on Afghan Civilians

January 9, 2002

On December 30, U.S. airstrikes hit the village of Niazi Kala (also called
Qalaye Niaze) in eastern Afghanistan, killing dozens of civilians. The
attack was major news in several U.K. newspapers, with the Guardian and the
Independent running front-page stories. The headlines were straightforward:
"U.S. Accused of Killing Over 100 Villagers in Airstrike" (Guardian,
1/1/02);  "U.S. Accused of Killing 100 Civilians in Afghan Bombing Raid"
(Independent, 1/1/02); "'100 Villagers Killed' in U.S. Airstrike" (London
Times, 1/1/02).

In contrast, the New York Times first reported the civilian deaths at Niazi
Kala under the headline "Afghan Leader Warily Backs U.S. Bombing" (1/2/02).

The U.N. estimated that 52 civilians were killed by the U.S. attack,
including 25 children, and disputed Pentagon claims that those killed were
linked to Al Qaeda. According to the U.N., "unarmed women and children" were
"chased and killed by American helicopters," some "as they fled to shelter"
and others "as they tried to rescue survivors" (London Times, 1/4/02).
Noting that "innumeracy, rapid burial, damage to bodies, propaganda" and
"remoteness" make it difficult to reach a precise count of any of the
civilian deaths in Afghanistan, the Guardian reported that surviving
villagers estimated anywhere between 32 and 107 dead, with the higher number
coming from staff at the local hospital (1/7/02).

The Pentagon contends that the village was a legitimate military target
because it sheltered Taliban leaders, Al Qaeda fighters and an ammunition
dump, and reporters who toured the destruction saw evidence of a substantial
weapons cache. But local residents denied links to the Taliban or Al Qaeda,
and said that in fact many of those killed were guests in town for a
wedding. As the Los Angeles Times has pointed out (1/8/02), the attack
"raises difficult questions about the accuracy of the local information the
United States is getting about the whereabouts of remaining Al Qaeda
fighters."

Descriptions of the destruction in Niazi Kala from reporters on the scene
have been shocking. Guardian correspondent Rory Carroll (1/7/02) reported
seeing "bloodied children's shoes and skirts, bloodied school books, the
scalp of a woman with braided grey hair, butter toffees in red wrappers,
wedding decorations." Similarly, the Los Angeles Times' Alissa J. Rubin
reported "fragments of skull with black braided hair decorated with silver
thread-- an accessory common among women in this region," a child's "severed
shoe" and other evidence that "makes clear that women and children were
killed by the U.S. bombing" (1/8/02).

The New York Times, however, has shied away from such graphic accounts. In
its January 2 article, the Times treated reports that "up to 100 villagers
in Paktia Province had been killed" not so much as a story in its own right,
but as background to the issue of whether Hamid Karzai, head of the interim
Afghan government, was holding firm in "his support for the war against
terrorism." Further details on the killings at Niazi Kala were scarce, but
Times readers did learn that "part way through the interview, an aide
entered carrying two scones" sent by Karzai's sister-in-law in Baltimore.
The Times apparently included this information to support Karzai's
contention that "things now seemed quite organized and civilized" in
Afghanistan.

The following day, the New York Times provided more information about Niazi
Kala, but once again nestled the story within an article on a related topic,
this one about accusations that warlord Pacha Khan Zadran has provided false
information to the U.S., leading to the airstrikes that last month struck a
convoy of tribal leaders (1/3/02). The attack on Niazi Kala-- which some
have suggested was also targeted on Zadran's recommendation (Independent,
1/4/02)-- came up when the Times reported Zadran's "assessment" that the
villagers had been linked to the Taliban and therefore legitimate targets.
Commendably, the Times did contrast Zadran's version on the story with the
U.N.'s "far more chilling account of the human cost of destroying the
weapons stash," quoting the report at some length. Unfortunately, these
important details were buried in the middle of the page A15 story, reflected
neither in its headline nor its lead.

In response to international pressure, including a British Member of
Parliament's formal demands for an inquiry, the Pentagon has agreed to
investigate the attack on Niazi Kala (Guardian, 1/4/02, 1/7/02). So far, the
New York Times has not reported this fact.

The Times' poor reporting of this story comes in the midst of a general
failure of the mainstream U.S. press to seriously investigate the extent of
civilian casualties in Afghanistan and the legality of the U.S. attacks.

ACTION: Please contact the New York Times and encourage it to cover civilian
casualties caused by U.S. attacks on Afghanistan, like those at Niazi Kala,
as an important story in their own right. You might also ask them to follow
closely and critically the Pentagon's investigation into the attack on Niazi
Kala.

CONTACT:
New York Times
229 West 43rd St.
New York, NY 10036-3959
mailto:nytnews at nytimes.com
Toll free comment line: 1-888-NYT-NEWS

As always, please remember that your comments are taken more seriously if
you maintain a polite tone. Please cc fair at fair.org with your
correspondence.

                               ----------


                                  FAIR
                             (212) 633-6700
                          http://www.fair.org/
                          E-mail: fair at fair.org