NYT Kisses David Petraeus’ Boo Boos To Make Them Better

I’m going to spoil this blowjob masquerading as profile for you. Here are the last three sentences of Scott Shane’s 1,500 word “news” piece on how David Petraeus’ image has taken a hit because his agency 1) missed that the militias we’re partnering with in Libya were trying to kill us 2) gave poor intelligence that made the Administration look bad 3) asked for drones in response to this massive HUMINT failure.

Mr. Petraeus’s future has inevitably been the subject of rumors: that he would be Mitt Romney’s running mate, or, more plausibly, that he was interested in the presidency of Princeton. In a statement in late September, he did not rule that out for the future, but said that for the time being he was “living the dream here at C.I.A.” That was before the recriminations this week over Benghazi.

So in the interest of rehabilitating Petraeus’ image so he can run for President of Princeton or America, Shane explains,

  • Petraeus’ “deliberately low profile” is what created the void that in turn created the media firestorm, not the CIA failures themselves
  • Petraeus “abruptly abandoned” his media star role when he became Director of the CIA
  • Petraeus’ trip to Turkey to consult on Syria–which was covered by the press–”went all but unnoticed by the news media” (no word on whether Petraeus is responsible for a suspect in the Libya attack expecting he could use Turkey as a gateway to join jihadists in Syria)

In short, the whole thing seems designed to prove that Petraeus hasn’t been the media hog his aides proved him to be yesterday (Shane points out Petraeus was out of the country when his aides orchestrated this media blitz) … in a profile about his image in the Paper of Record.

And nowhere does Shane, a national security reporter by trade, deal with whether the underlying issues–the HUMINT failures and the problematic response–themselves constitute failures. This is a report about image, completely ignoring that underneath that image there are real questions of performance that should be what drives the image, not fluff pieces in the NYT.

David Petraeus cannot fail, you see. He can only have his image failed by his own silence.

And to top off the substanceless image, all this is peppered with quotes from–among others–Michael O’Hanlon, described as a friend and an advisor.

“He thinks he has to be very discreet and let others in the government do the talking,” said Michael E. O’Hanlon, a Brookings Institution scholar who is a friend of Mr. Petraeus’s and a member of the C.I.A.’s advisory board.

[snip]

Whatever the challenges of his first year, said Mr. O’Hanlon, his friend, “I’m confident in saying that he loves this job.”

“He may miss the military at an emotional level,” he added, “but he loves this work.”

Wait! David Petraeus has appointed “his friend” Michael O’Hanlon to advise him about “Intelligence”? And Shane now turns to “his friend” to … what? Reassure Americans David Petraeus loves his job even if four people are dead and we have gaping holes in HUMINT?

We are a democracy. Citizens should expect that our news media report facts so we can assess the performance of those who wield tremendous power in our name. Maybe Petraeus failed. Maybe he did not. But that is the question before us. Not whether Benghazi makes it less likely he’ll be President of Princeton one day.

It is not, however, the role of our news media to kiss top officials’ boo boos publicly when they’ve experienced setbacks.

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

10 Responses to NYT Kisses David Petraeus’ Boo Boos To Make Them Better

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz Hey, maybe NK did actually order cyber attack on SONY. But,where's evid? If you believe the rote bullshit of the UD Govt, you are an idiot.
8mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz If you have any doubt about that, just look at how the official USG has delayed and dissembled about the Senate Torture Report.
12mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz I have NO IDEA what's correct about the SONY hack; however, history shows that the US Govt is no more reliable, nor honest, than the NK govt
13mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Good Golly Miss Molly, what were odds proven unreliable, false statementing, reporters like US Govt would spew self serving shit about NK?
15mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @fmanjoo: North Korea Almost Certainly Did Not Hack Sony by @kimzetter http://t.co/yfePwI9xN4
19mreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV RT @atotalmonet: Anonymous threats by hackers against women: "grow thicker skin!" Anonymous threats by hackers against movie studios: "COD…
27mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz If false equivalency media did not give bleating false equivalency to retrograde craven bigoted jackasses like Cruz we'd all be better off.
33mreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV Movie terror alert level RED! I repeat RED! Hide the women! Evacuate the children first. We're all gonna die!!1!! Hellllllp!
48mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Why Robert Menendez and Marco Rubio are blithering idiots worthy of public+press scorn re: Cuba policy https://t.co/kdMQlWuD4t
57mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Apparently Jeb! 1) doesn't yet have 22 people reviewing his statements/tweets 2) is not the guy to sell edu-snake-oil
57mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @gdebenedetti: Jeb Bush's statement, which had called the Castros "benefactors" of Obama's new policy, has been quietly updated. Now say…
58mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @MikeScarcella: 'Davis had, at most, a diminished expectation of privacy in business records made ... by MetroPCS.' New DOJ brief: http:…
1hreplyretweetfavorite
November 2012
S M T W T F S
« Oct   Dec »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930