October 15, 2007

It's the Coverup that Kills You, Part 2

At Powerline this morning, Scott Johnson is keeping the screws on the editors of The New Republic in a post entitled It's the Coverup that Kills You, Part 2, in which he continues to hammer editor Franklin Foer and executive editor Peter Scoblic:

On August 10, after assuring their readers that they had "not thus far uncovered factual evidence (aside from one key detail) to discount his personal dispatches" (how can a detail be key, but not factual?) the editors asked the Army to allow them, "or any other media outlet, for that matter," to speak with Beauchamp. This statement is particularly galling in retrospect, as we now know that it is TNR -- not the Army -- that has gagged Beauchamp. On September 7 "the editors" asked their author to cancel interviews he had scheduled with the Washington Post and Newsweek. Given their "commitment to the truth," one wonders why they would make such a request. But do they deny that they did?

TNR editor Franklin Foer and executive editor Peter Scoblic seem to think that they can keep up this charade indefinitely, but it is only the indifference of the MSM that has let them get away with it for this long. "The editors" closed their August 10 update by saying that they "refused to rush to judgment on our writer or ourselves" -- virtually the only honest statement we've ever gotten from TNR on this matter. But it should not be the last. At some point they'll have to say something on the subject, only then the questions won't be about Beauchamp. They will be about "the editors."

Johnson is keying in on what has emerged as the real story involving The New Republic in regards to the Scott Thomas Beauchamp stories.

We know, due to expert testimony from civilians in the region and in the United States, from veterans and soldiers, and a formal military investigation, that Beauchamp’s claims were without merit. For all practical intents and purposes, Scott Beauchamp’s role in this story is over.

The story of his editors at The New Republic, and why they have chosen to deceive both their critics and their readership, is the story now.

To borrow a paraphrase from another time, what did the editors of TNR know, and when did they know it? How will the Washington Post and Newsweek react to being "punk'd" by Franklin Foer? What do their advertisers think about the magazine’s continued refusal to admit their editorial failures, and will they be disgusted enough to consider suspending or closing their accounts?

The days and weeks ahead promise to be interesting for the editors of The New Republic.

Update: Beauchamp's second story, "Dead of Night" was quickly pegged from the very beginning as evidence of the fact that The New Republic was not making any attempt at all to fact-check Beauchamp's stories, back even before we knew his name was Beauchamp.

In "Dead of Night" Beauchamp alleged the Iraqi Police must have committed a murder, because according to him, only Iraqi Police carry Glock pistols.

Glock wishes that were so.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at October 15, 2007 03:23 PM

TNR is little more than Mother Jones in pants - they look swell in the Buster-Brown outfit though.

Posted by: DirtCrashr at October 15, 2007 05:58 PM

Bob, I don't think it will be interesting at all over the next few days and weeks. TNR won't say anything. It will be business as usual.

Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at October 15, 2007 06:52 PM


What you said.

I think this whole sad and sordid affair is over.

The advertisers don't care.

The readers don't care.

The publishers don't care.

The editors don't care.

The only person who should care is "Gracie" who got fired for exposing STB's relationship with TNR and his "fact-checking", editing wife.

No, no one cares.

And the reason no one cares is because there is no sense of shame at TNR.

Which is surprising given Martin Peretz's bona fides and long standing history as an intellectual and professional writer/editor.

Oh well.

The best you can say is that it sucks to be them.

And it sucks to be us.


Just sayin'.

Posted by: MTT at October 15, 2007 07:05 PM

This doesn't end until we get the sequel to "Shattered Glass."
Trouble is, in the sequel, it's beginning to look like the editor will be the villian instead of the hero.

Posted by: Jim O'Sullivan at October 15, 2007 08:17 PM

The majority of TNR's readership is far to the left. They approve of smearing the troops and undermining the war effort. I wouldn't be surprised if they actually experience a net GAIN in subscribers as the unhinged left open their wallets in support.

Posted by: BigDaddyT at October 15, 2007 08:42 PM

I will bet a round of beers that Eve Fairbanks is the editor who phonied up these stories (no matter how phony they began).

Just looke her up, look up the stories mentioned about her in the Urban Dictionary. Look up the stuff about her stories by GMontag on Slashdot.

Even easier, just read "Big Shame in a Small World" in the Examiner vs. "How Not to Steal a Cell Phone" in the New York Times". The read the Beauchamp stories.

You will see how it all fits.

Posted by: Anon at October 15, 2007 09:42 PM

I appreciate the way you, the Power Line guys, and a few others are keeping the pressure on. I think most of us feel like we know dang well TNR isn't going to do a thing because their readership is far left and couldn't care less. They all buy into the same narrative. I think I would have let it go a while ago just out of the feeling that it's useless at this point.

But the fact is it's not useless and the truth needs to prevail. Heads need to roll. Keep up the good work my friend. Keep it up!

Posted by: T.Ferg at October 15, 2007 11:33 PM

Here's a thought experiment. Is it possible to shame The Nation? Why then would it be possible to shame TNR?

Posted by: Banjo at October 16, 2007 09:19 AM

Owners could care.

Posted by: kim at October 16, 2007 09:57 AM

I have a post-it note stuck to my computer monitor. It has Franklin Foyer’s email address on it. Every Monday, when I come into the office, I shoot him an email that says: “Is this the week you’ll give a full accounting and/or apology concerning the Scott Beauchamp debacle? We’re still waiting… And waiting… And waiting. The story is not going to go away.”

For anyone interested in doing the same, his email address is:

Posted by: virtue001 at October 16, 2007 10:09 AM

Isn't this more of "the narrative is correct even if the facts are wrong".

Posted by: David Stern at October 16, 2007 10:15 AM