Rathergate vs. Weaponsgate

By: Greg Mitchell It's only Thursday, and already it's clear that yesterday's official announcement that really, for sure -- no kidding -- there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq will get much less play in the media than the report on the ?60 Minutes? fiasco released on Monday. That's odd, since the news stories share one important element: Neither was exactly a whopping surprise.

Actually, there?s something else: Neither scandal would have ever happened if journalists had done a better job at the outset.

So how did the press react this morning to closing the book on WMDs? Most major papers I've seen, with several exceptions (such as The Washington Post and The Dallas Morning News), did not play it on the front page. The New York Times ran a microscropic item on A16. It did devote an editorial to the subject, and, after mocking the White House and TV commentators, the Times acknowledged "our own failures to deconstruct all the spin and faulty intelligence." Then it went back to bashing the "fantasies of feckless intelligence analysts" and holding President Bush strictly accountable for the fact that 40% of Americans still think WMDs are there.

But everyone was having a tough time explaining their original embrace of the WMD scenario. On the Jim Lehrer Newshour on Thursday night, Secretary of State Colin Powell admitted that the evidence on WMDs in Iraq that he presented to the U.N. was "not correct," but later in the interview called the same evidence "solid, and it was something that we could rely on."

No wonder Stephen Colbert, on The Daily Show a few hours later, said it was Saddam Hussein's fault, for not having the weapons.

While awaiting the fallout from the WMD non-finding finding, the blogosphere, as usual, rushed forward with some instant commentary. The blog known as The Poor Man quickly posted a revealing ?quantitative? analysis yesterday, comparing Rathergate with the Claims of Saddam?s WMD by the Media and the White House.

Here are some highlights, which I've slightly revised, with ?R? standing for Rathergate and "WMD" for Weaponsgate. This is not to minimize the egregious ?60 Minutes? failings but to highlight the lack of accountability for the egregious WMD claims:

***

Investigation recently concluded
R: Yes
WMD: Yes

Number of firings resulting
R: 4
WMD: 0

Use of highly questionable documents
R: Yes
WMD: Yes

Media spread questionable information
R: Yes
WMD: Yes

Central claim completely disproven
R: No
WMD: Yes

Number of wars started partly because of flawed journalism
R: 0
WMD: 1

Cost to American taxpayer
R: $0
WMD: $150 billion, so far

Number of American soldiers killed as a result
R: 0
WMD: 1,357, as of now

Number of Iraqi civilians killed as a result
R: 0
WMD: 10,000 to 100,000

Number of al-Qaeda training camps destroyed as a result
R: 0
WMD: 0

U.S. reputation severely damaged as a result
R: No
WMD: Yes

***

As the day went on, posters at the site made a few necessary additions.

CIA agents outed in effort to prevent or punish disclosure
R: 0
WMD: 1

Resulting government contracts for Halliburton
R: $0
WMD: $10 billion

Apologies issued by CBS: 2+
Apologies issued by the White House: 0

Medals of Freedom Awarded to those who played key role
R: 0
WMD: 3

***

And, I might add...

Key producer unwilling to admit wrongdoing
R: Mary Mapes
WMD: Judith Miller