Retired Major-General Lewis MacKenzie reasonably, in my opinion, criticized media coverage of the murder case involving Colonel Russell Williams. But at the same time, he smeared all journalists in much the same way he accuses journalists of smearing the Canadian Forces.
Retired Major-General Lewis MacKenzie slammed media coverage of Russell Williams, the Canadian Forces colonel accused of murdering two women, in a Globe and Mail column.
“Rarely
has Canadian news coverage of a high-profile criminal case offered so
much misleading speculation and so many erroneous conclusions as in the
charges against Colonel Russell Williams,” wrote MacKenzie. As
evidence, he briefly analysed the following stories: “‘RED FLAGS’ WERE
MISSED;” “COLONEL WAS ‘ON TRACK’ TO LEAD THE AIR FORCE;” “‘MORALE’ IS
LOW;””PART OF THE ‘ELITE’;” and “A GENERAL’S ‘RESPONSIBILITY.'”
I
think MacKenzie is absolutely right to complain. Some of the coverage
I’ve seen suggests the Williams criminal case stains all members of the
forces — who, in my opinion, are already asked to carry far too much
of our emotional baggage and who are already used shamelessly and
crudely as political pawns.
But MacKenzie pulled his punches: he
didn’t name names — or media organizations. Pity. By failing to call
out those he criticizes, and by neglecting to cite even one example of
professional and credible coverage of the case, he tarnished the
reputations of all journalists in exactly the same the way he
criticizes journalists for tarnishing the reputations of those in the
Canadian Forces.
Disclosure: My family includes Canadian Forces members.
[node:ad]
Major-general slams coverage of murder case involving colonel
Retired Major-General Lewis MacKenzie reasonably, in my opinion, criticized media coverage of the murder case involving Colonel Russell Williams. But at the same time, he smeared all journalists in much the same way he accuses journalists of smearing the Canadian Forces.
Retired Major-General Lewis MacKenzie slammed media coverage of Russell Williams, the Canadian Forces colonel accused of murdering two women, in a Globe and Mail column.
“Rarely
has Canadian news coverage of a high-profile criminal case offered so
much misleading speculation and so many erroneous conclusions as in the
charges against Colonel Russell Williams,” wrote MacKenzie. As
evidence, he briefly analysed the following stories: “‘RED FLAGS’ WERE
MISSED;” “COLONEL WAS ‘ON TRACK’ TO LEAD THE AIR FORCE;” “‘MORALE’ IS
LOW;””PART OF THE ‘ELITE’;” and “A GENERAL’S ‘RESPONSIBILITY.'”
I
think MacKenzie is absolutely right to complain. Some of the coverage
I’ve seen suggests the Williams criminal case stains all members of the
forces — who, in my opinion, are already asked to carry far too much
of our emotional baggage and who are already used shamelessly and
crudely as political pawns.
But MacKenzie pulled his punches: he
didn’t name names — or media organizations. Pity. By failing to call
out those he criticizes, and by neglecting to cite even one example of
professional and credible coverage of the case, he tarnished the
reputations of all journalists in exactly the same the way he
criticizes journalists for tarnishing the reputations of those in the
Canadian Forces.
Disclosure: My family includes Canadian Forces members.
[node:ad]Deborah Jones
February 12, 2010
My family,
My family, too…..
March 9, 2010
If there was evidence that
If there was evidence that “red flags” were missed, then it is fair to report on it. However, I’ve yet to see coverage that really points out any such red flags. Some of the coverage also suggested that military members will have have a hard time living it down. How? There is no evidence that anybody in the military had suspicions that he was doing things like this, and covered it up. The most anyone seems to be able to say is that he is a rather intense fellow, which is something I’d expect from a committed soldier of his rank and in his position. But lots of high-activity people are intense. I don’t know any people outside the media who think that one possible psychopath in the military stains all members. If he had been a plumber, would we say he stains the reputation of all plumbers? I don’t get the connection for that story line.