Yeah, the solution (in this case) would be for the AP to buy reports from another news service and forward that under their by line (with no editing).... Your right, doing their own is an obvious conflict of interest (to anyone but the idiots at the AP)....

Exactly Thomass- and bringing over stories from Al-Reuters certainly isnt going to risk any less of a slant, idealogically speaking. Might even do them a favor.

The AP can't claim to adhere to any of the bullets listed in their rules...

Hey, AP makes those rules for the other guys, not themselves. The 'we' in their Statement of News Values and Principles is wholly imperial.

Basically, they consider themselves to reside at the peak of the pinnacle - down the sides of which they roll balls of blame intended to bash the lesser beings who reside below.

It was interesting that when Bilal Hussein was arrested, that he didn't identify himself as a journalist. One would think that an innocent objective journalist would immediately announce himself as a journalist, in order to avoid detention.

A few years ago (after 2003), there was a killing of Iraqi election workers on Haifa Street. Belmont Club did an analysis of where the photographer was, etc., and showed that it was extremely likely that the photographer was there at that spot on Haifa Street, because he KNEW there was going to be a killing. The victims were dragged out of their car, and positioned on the road so that the photographer had a clear view of the murders.

He was a stringer for the AP. And I understand that he got a pulitzer for that wonderful up to the minute photo.

Anyway. I seem to remember that the name of the photographer was Bilal Hussein. Am I correct?

identifying the board of directors of the AP is very educational.

These people are mostly owners of strings of newspapers in the Middle West and the South states of the USA.

Interesting, eh??

These people are mostly owners of strings of newspapers in the Middle West and the South states of the USA.

Interesting indeed! Midwest, South and corporate conglomerates: the moonbatty Lefty trifecta!

Oh, wait...

Why are we surprised that a "journalist" is working for the other side? They wanted the North to win in Vietnam and made it happen. Now that UPI has folded, AP has a virtual monopoly on wire service in this country. It's too easy for lazy journalists to simply print the wire news verbatim.

Early in this war, the press was embedded with our units, a practice the left criticized as being overly pro-military. The real danger was the truth - coalition troops were (and still are) doing a wonderful job under awful conditions. The left could not allow that narrative to prevail.

Al Qaeda intimidated the press when they killed the 4 reporters in Afghanistan driving them to rely on stringers that the terrorists willingly provide. Reporters can stay drunk in the Green Zone and publish second hand accounts or just make things up or hire idiots like Beauchamp. The real issue here is not Bilal Hussein, it's ground truth vs AP and MSM propaganda.

The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the - Web Reconnaissance for 12/11/2007 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.

NovAnoM, I think you missed the key part of the quote,

"strings of newspapers"

Now, given that most journalists are left leaning and democratic the obvious conclusion is indeed, the bosses of the AP are likly "moonbatty" and "lefty".

Nice try though!

Now, given that most journalists are left leaning and democratic

How many journalists do you reckon own "strings of newspapers?" How many journalists own even one newspaper? Not many at all, I'm guessing.

Right back atcha with the "nice try."

The AP only holds to standards when there is a "controlling legal authority" (as a former vice president might say).

No "controlling legal authority," and their standards are worth less than the paper they're allegedly printed on.

...How many journalists do you reckon own "strings of newspapers?"...

How many owners of newspapers sit around in the green zone hiring insurgent stringers and soothing their BDS and schilling for their political party with fabricated anti war, "its a quagmire", "its civil war" reports.

Nice try, keep trying if you must

Grrr, I think you just bit a liberal. Go get your rabies and distemper shots quick, maybe something to prevent STD while you're at it. They aren't that crazy by choice so it must be some disease destroying their brain.

Grr:

Now you're changing the topic. Heather's point--though rather elliptically stated--seems to be that the AP's board is obviously liberal because they are business owners in the Midwest and South. All three of those factors would tend, on the surface, to argue against a default liberal leaning.

They may be liberal, but not for those reasons.

Also: if that's not the point Heather is trying to make, then she should be a little more straightforward.

They may be liberal, but not for those reasons.

Those seem to be your biases, NovAnoM. Chicago is the Midwest. Atlanta is the South. New Orleans is the South. John Edwards is from South Carolina. Bill Clinton is from Arkansas. Jimmy Carter is from Georgia. What's your point? That newspaper publishers generally aren't liberal? That Southerners can't be liberal?

Now, I wonder how that holds up to the AP Managing Editors Code of Ethics, revised 2004 from 1999?

Well, we can say that the first issue, beyond trying to hold themselves to the highest standards, etc., is this:

The public's right to know about matters of importance is paramount. The newspaper has a special responsibility as surrogate of its readers to be a vigilant watchdog of their legitimate public interests.

Apparently we now need a watchdog over AP... coming up the Responsibility section we get:

The good newspaper is fair, accurate, honest, responsible, independent and decent. Truth is its guiding principle.

It avoids practices that would conflict with the ability to report and present news in a fair, accurate and unbiased manner.
It would appear that AP has a vested interest in seeing a particular outcome in the Bilal Hussein affair and should really report on THAT, so that we, the public, can get a fair assessment of their attitudes so we can see if their reporting is unbiased or not.

Then, a bit futher down, in the Accuracy section...

The newspaper should guard against inaccuracies, carelessness, bias or distortion through emphasis, omission or technological manipulation.

It should acknowledge substantive errors and correct them promptly and prominently.
Could we get some of that from AP? Please?

How about the Integrity section?

The newspaper should strive for impartial treatment of issues and dispassionate handling of controversial subjects. It should provide a forum for the exchange of comment and criticism, especially when such comment is opposed to its editorial positions. Editorials and expressions of personal opinion by reporters and editors should be clearly labeled. Advertising should be differentiated from news.

The newspaper should report the news without regard for its own interests, mindful of the need to disclose potential conflicts. It should not give favored news treatment to advertisers or special-interest groups.

It should report matters regarding itself or its personnel with the same vigor and candor as it would other institutions or individuals. Concern for community, business or personal interests should not cause the newspaper to distort or misrepresent the facts.
Is AP doing that for us? Giving us the canodor about themselves so that we can see how accurate and fair their reporting is on this? I'm starting to get the idea that they don't even read their own guidelines...

Then their Independence section, which covers more in the line of taking gifts, etc., but does yield this as its first part:

The newspaper and its staff should be free of obligations to news sources and newsmakers. Even the appearance of obligation or conflict of interest should be avoided.

Stories should not be written or edited primarily for the purpose of winning awards and prizes. Self-serving journalism contests and awards that reflect unfavorably on the newspaper or the profession should be avoided.

Those sorts of things don't need to be 'updated' too often and don't change much via a change in media type. Good, solid reporting is up front when there can be bias present, explains itself when reporting may be tainted by institutional or personal views, and is up-front about such things, not burying them where they can't be found. Their 1999/2004 version does carry standard 'public advocate' phrases, also, but that pertains to openness in government and reporting on same and the editorial side when it takes issues of public concern... those do not de-obligate AP from being up front in its biases, viewpoints and how they ensure that the public gets reliable reporting.

Those are what ethics are about, and when an organization publishes them, they are expected to adhere to them or explain why they have deviated from them. The public, as they point out, has the right to know this so that we can judge AP on its reporting fairly, and ensure that they hold themselves to their standards of eliminating bias and being up front about it. They state as much, the AP Managing Editors do... unless they have changed their view to remove their ethics.

What's your point? That newspaper publishers generally aren't liberal? That Southerners can't be liberal?

My point is that someone is not liberal because they own a newspaper. That's what Heather's suggesting.

What's your point? That the midwest and the south are suddenly Blue zones? Interesting.

My point is that someone is not liberal because they own a newspaper.

It's probably a better generalization than locality.

That the midwest and the south are suddenly Blue zones?

No, they're mostly purple as is most of America. Many of the margins that make places blue or red are not terribly large.