"The editors then ask Beauchamp to cancel scheduled interviews with the WASHINGTON POST and NEWSWEEK."

Why would these 'journalists' want to supress the news? Now they want to censor what the subject of a news story says and where he says it? Aren't they always telling us that 'we have a right to know'?

I'm on the second page of the first document, and I already feel if the leaker should ever disclose his or her ID, I'd like to buy them a beer. Or a brewery.

Bob Owens has done yeoman's work on this story from the beginning, and has been one of the few keeping the pressure on (or, at least keeping the story alive despite TNR's best efforts to ignore it in the hope it would fade away). I would have been disinclined to agree with his assessment on the future of Foer, Scoblic, and Zengerle, though - had it not been for the leak of the transcript.

You see, Confederate Yankee and a few other conservative commentators aside, there has been no great and swelling demand by TNR readers to get to the bottom of the story. Their liberal readers understand it was only another "fake-but-accurate" arrow in the sling of the anti-war, anti-Bush, anti-American media archers, and were perfectly willing to accept that. For the left, a lie exposed is always quickly forgotten as they MoveOn to the next lie. No big deal.

The transcript, however, must have come from the inside - and one suspects that, even on the inside of TNR, only the highest honchos were privy to its contents (their internal security has been tightened ever since they fired a staffer for "leaking" the pertinent fact that Beauchamp was MARRIED to a "TNR fact-checker").

Someone is feeling pressure from somewhere - perhaps a major donor threatened to bolt, or maybe the other Big Media types on the DC Cocktail Circuit were incensed that the CBS crew had to fall on their swords in 2004 while TNR seemingly just walked away from their own train wreck without so much as a bruised ego.

When the insiders with enough juice to HAVE a copy of the transcript begin to leak it, someone will have to go. And not a moment too soon, either.

They'll finger the leaker as someone without much power and can them as proxy.

I doubt it came from TNR. Most likely it came from someone in the army. Of course, if that's the case they can always try and shift the target to the bad leakers.

where is barney et. al. to insist that the stories are still true?

I gotta say, I feel a smidgen sorry for TNR in that beauchamp and his fiancee screwed them big time. I think they really are trying to get the truth out of beauchamp now so they can dismiss the stories or not. Obviously, they should have been more open from the start, and just said that they are trying to verify the stories, instead of saying that they already did. Actually, on second thought, screw them.

Totally agree--read the whole first installment with TNR editors--they have no ethics or morals.

They're trying to play Beauchamps wife against him, and they are trying to "manage" the story. They are asking him not to recant, even though they must realize it's a story full of bull.

These people are creepy.

And, they bought him a "lawyer" obviously to try to get him to shut up.

Unbelievable.

Pretty quite in trolldom.

I suspect a "fake, but accurate" defense soon...

Barney? Nogo? Brian? Hello?

*crickets*

Is it to much to expect objectivity and accuracy in the media??

Yes. Yes it is.

It must be a painful descent from "Hemingway" to "Jayson Blair."

There is a line in there from Foer to beauchamp's lawyer that says:

"...if he's not able to tell us that he stands by his stories then we'd have to publish some sort of statement saying that we are no longer able to stand by them."

Who wants to bet that that is EXACTLY what TNR will do..and ONLY that. They will put out a statment that states something to the effect of..."Due to recent developments, TNR can no longer stand by the stories of Scott Thomas Beauchamp". And that will be it. Mark my words!

It must be a painful descent from "Hemingway" to "Jayson Blair."

OUCH! lol

Somethings very strange that the documents are no longer available on Drudge, and there is not even a mention of the whole story. What gives?

I totally forgot about Media Mythbusters! How's that site doing, anyway?

By the way kudos on getting the lascivious Chris Muir to design the logo for that site, but someone should have told him that a magnifying glass is supposed to, you know, magnify. And would have been so hard to squeeze some cartoon chick in her underwear in somewhere?

Btw Jim, TNR is not anti-war. They have supported every military intervention since Marty Peretz took over in 1974, including both wars in Iraq. Hell, they endorsed Joe Lieberman in 2004. Anti-war liberals are not big readers of TNR.

Comment crossposted at some site no one reads.

Looking forward to full coverage of this lie coming apart in the MSM.

Not.

18. Posted by mantis | October 24, 2007 5:12 PM | Score: -2 (2 votes cast)

Posted on October 24, 2007 17:12

Wow, 3 attempts at deflection in 1 post.

Impressive.

Deflection? I don't work for TNR.

Deflection topped with a non sequitur... Excellent, your training is complete.

Deflection? I don't work for TNR.

Hey, at least your defense of them is worth what they paid for it.

Really, mantis, give this one up. The anti-war left embraced the STB stories wholeheartedly, and TNR, which has been a prime example of Bush Derangement Syndrome among the media, sold those stories without an ounce of fact-checking, stonewalled when they fell apart, and is continuing to deflect and deny as their credibility crumbles completely.

You've been a distinguished member of the respectable "opposition," don't throw that away where it's not worth it.

Sorry, but I expected someone to point out already the poignancy of the statement about how "important" it was to Beauchamp's wife that he "not recant." The wife thatg works for TNR.

Sound a bit like, well, um... "Scott, if you recant..."

This poor sap is so far over his head he needs a periscope to view the Mariana Trench.

Ok, you guys caught me. I commented to deflect attention from TNR, despite the fact that I don't even like the publication, that the entire rightosphere has jumped on it like a pack of wolves (yeah, I'm going to stop this behemoth all by myself), and by all accounts it seems clear that Beauchamp fabricated at least some of what he wrote, and now he and the editors at TNR would love nothing more than for it all to go away. You have discovered my grand strategy; back to the drawing board.

The right is having fun with their fresh kill (well, maybe not so fresh), and that's just fine with me. But that's not going to stop me from a) continuing to make fun of www.TheEvilLiberalMSMisEvilandLiberal.com, er, Media Mythbusters, or b) pointing out that TNR is not exactly the liberal rag that everyone on the right has been claiming since the Beauchamp affair began. I'm glad the fact that TNR learned nothing from the Stephen Glass disaster has been revealed. No really, I am. Any publication that thought nation building in an ethnically split Arab country was a good idea is not one I value very highly, anyway.

As far as "anti-war left embraced the STB stories wholeheartedly," certainly some on the left defended them, but no one really even noticed them until the right discovered "Scott Thomas" and decided he was the second coming (or going) of Dan Rather. He's not, but it's still a nice head over the mantle. Enjoy.

Another funny "deflection," Peretz, who's still editor-in-chief, sold his share of the magazine in February to CanWest. Good timing.

wavemaker,

The wife has apparently left TNR. Her internship was up. Gee, interns married to writers fact-checking? Good thinking! Wonder why they didn't offer her a fulltime position...

mantis,

You may not be current with the thinking at TNR. While they were not kum-ba-ya singers some time ago, since the rise of Foer they decided to go a new direction, a vehemently anti-war direction. Also, Elsbeth's departure was given little or no fanfare. Claims that her internship expired seem odd, seeing as she was on the masthead, not normally a bastion of interns.

What I found surprising was the TNR lads telling STB not to speak to Newsweek or the WaPo. Oh, and that they never told their readers about the phone interview, while insisting that the Army was holding STB incommunicado.

Maybe "not surprising" would fit better there.

The right is having fun with their fresh kill (well, maybe not so fresh),

Heh. 'not so fresh'.
Yep, stonewall, deny and delay as long as possible. Then, when the truth comes out later say 'Oh, why are you still talking about that. It's been covered extensively already. It's old news'. That way, they never have to say 'I was wrong' and are never held accountable by the public or their peers.

Someone has to see the humor (and utter humiliation) in these transcripts, such as :

Foer telling a soldier and his audience (including a squad leader) that "various very serious questions have been raised"! I wonder if drill instructors will seize that line?

Note Scobic's crab walking from the beginning:

"I was not around (when the stories ran)"

BTW, mantis

Good call on the Peretz transfer of ownership. Who knows where this rag's editorial content will end up...if they survive this. The coverup always sinks the ship.

Foer gets absurdly Stalinist with his claim that TNR should have sole access to Beauchamp.
==============================

Where are the owners, and why shouldn't they listen to mantis?
=============================

What we know is that TNR continues to lie to its readers. This should finally end the very existance of the publication given that they have no credibility left.

Aspersions be upon the owners.
===============================