The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [casi] A nasty slip on the iraqi oil




[11] http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,972620,00.html
> An article was removed from the Guardian recently...

It's still on other websites - with the appropriate
editorial comment.

> The readers' editor on the reasons why a report
> on the Guardian website was deleted

This is a truly amazing story. I guess you might
call it modular website journalism.

On June 2, 2003, die Welt publishes an article,
based entirely on English-language sources: "In
the case of North Korea, Wolfowitz relies on its
neighbours. This refers to the IISS Asia Security
Conference in Singapore.

Welt does _not_ claim or not directly imply that,
according to Wolfowitz, oil had been the was the
reason for this war. Anyhow, Welt should know that
it was 'Befreiung'. But everyone who read it won't
forget that quote. (It will stick to Wolfowitz.)
http://www.welt.de/data/2003/06/02/105924.html

Then der Tagesspiegel finds this Welt article and
promptly writes its own little paragraph - citing
Welt as the source. Their headline: "Oil is the
reason for Iraq war says Wolfowitz - US Congress
is to investigate." NB: there is _nothing_ about
US Congress investigating in the Welt article.
http://archiv.tagesspiegel.de/archiv/03.06.2003/596952.asp

A little later, Guardian journalists find both
the Welt article and the Tagesspiegel paragraph.
Apparently, they like the latter's headline. So
they write: "Wolfowitz: Iraq War Was About Oil."
They also take an entire paragraph from the Welt,
(the one with the oil quote), translate it,
and build their own story around it.

And they cite the sources: "The latest comments",
writes the Guardian, "were made by Mr Wolfowitz
in an address to delegates at an Asian security
summit in Singapore at the weekend, and reported
today by German newspapers Der Tagesspiegel and
Die Welt." (June 4, 2003.)
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0604-10.htm

It is ironic that the Guardian should attribute
this reporting on the "latest comments" to foreign
sources: They themselves published an AP article,
including the original oil quote, on May 31, 2003.
"U.S. to Put Economic Pressure on N. Korea",
d'Arcy Doran, May 31, 203.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-2736108,00.html

Not all critics were satisfied with the retraction,
concedes the Guardian: "rigorous checking should have
taken place. The hazard of translating remarks from
German back into the English in which they were
originally made should have been apparent."

For the "rigorous checking", they could have gone
to their own files. And the backtranslation was
quite faithful to the German. It was the
interpretation that seemed rather fluid.

Here are the three headlines again:

Die Welt:
"In the case of North Korea, Wolfowitz relies
on its neighbours.

Der Tagespiegel:
"Oil is the reason for Iraq war says Wolfowitz -
US Congress is to investigate."

The Guardian:
"Wolfowitz: Iraq War Was About Oil."

---Elga





_______________________________________________
Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss
To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk


[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]