Tag Archives: drone strikes

Fact-checking The Newsroom

The Season 2 premiere of The Newsroom aired last night.
The Season 2 premiere of The Newsroom aired last night.

HBO’s The Newsroom returned to television last night, and it was borderline obsessive about drone strikes. (As for the storytelling itself, there is, so far, no sign of improvement since the conclusion of Season 1.) In the midst of the rhetorical maelstrom — this is an Aaron Sorkin show, after all — I couldn’t help but notice that Sloan Sabbith (Olivia Munn) had this to say about drone strikes during an on-air panel:

We don’t know exactly what that collateral damage is because of the lack of any transparency or accountability. Now factor in that the B.D.A. — the bomb damage assessment — counts all military-age males as militants.

The show depicted this particular airing of News Night as having taken place on August 24th, 2011. The only problem? The New York Times actually broke the story about all military-age males being counted as combatants nearly a full year later, in an article published on May 29, 2012:

It is also because Mr. Obama embraced a disputed method for counting civilian casualties that did little to box him in. It in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants, according to several administration officials, unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent.

But in interviews, three former senior intelligence officials expressed disbelief that the number could be so low. The C.I.A. accounting has so troubled some administration officials outside the agency that they have brought their concerns to the White House. One called it “guilt by association” that has led to “deceptive” estimates of civilian casualties.

“It bothers me when they say there were seven guys, so they must all be militants,” the official said. “They count the corpses and they’re not really sure who they are.”

As far as I know, the closest that most of the mainstream media came to openly contesting the administration’s counting policy before the night of August 24th, 2011 was in another New York Times article from August 11th of that year:

The civilian toll of the C.I.A.’s drone campaign, which is widely credited with disrupting Al Qaeda and its allies in Pakistan’s tribal area, has been in bitter dispute since the strikes were accelerated in 2008. Accounts of strike after strike from official and unofficial sources are so at odds that they often seem to describe different events.

The debate has intensified since President Obama’s top counterterrorism adviser, John O. Brennan, clearly referring to the classified drone program, said in June that for almost a year, “there hasn’t been a single collateral death because of the exceptional proficiency, precision of the capabilities we’ve been able to develop.” Other officials say that extraordinary claim still holds: since May 2010, C.I.A. officers believe, the drones have killed more than 600 militants — including at least 20 in a strike reported Wednesday — and not a single noncombatant.

But that article is a far cry from the definitive declaration made by Sloan Sabbith on last night’s episode of The Newsroom. I suppose this is just one more trademark of Aaron Sorkin. It’s not just his depiction of women that’s anachronistic: even his series on news reporting can’t get the story in the right order.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Drones: a history in tweets

Josh Begley, realizing how little Americans know or understand about their own country’s drone warfare, began tweeting the entire history of American drone strikes yesterday. He’s still going:

For the past several years, Begley, who previously worked at an organizationthat uses technology to advance social-justice movements, has felt a nagging need to open Americans’ eyes to the reality of this method of warfare. Begley himself says he “started caring about the issue because I knew so little about [drones].” Then Jane Mayer’s 2009 New Yorker piece, “The Predator War,” which brought readers into the air-conditioned Langley, Va., offices from which drone attacks are ordered, got him thinking.

Drones “bring up all sorts of interesting questions about the intersection of technology and international law and human rights,” he told The Daily Beast. “A bureaucratic chain of command deciding to execute [people] outside any law is a very interesting concept intellectually.” And so, last summer, he set to work designing an app that would map U.S. strikes, to bring a far-away war into the palms of everyday Americans.

Drone+, as the application is called, culls public information compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism about U.S. attacks, translates the data into a user-friendly map, and pushes notifications to users every time a new strike hits.

A representative sampling:

Drone strikes and the New York Times

Public editor Margaret Sullivan pings the Times for its fuzzy coverage of civilian casualties resulting from drone strikes:

Some of the most important reporting on drone strikes has been done at The Times, particularly the “kill list” article by Scott Shane and Jo Becker last May. Those stories, based on administration leaks, detailed President Obama’s personal role in approving whom drones should set out to kill.

Groundbreaking as that article was, it left a host of unanswered questions. The Times and the American Civil Liberties Union have filed Freedom of Information requests to learn more about the drone program, so far in vain. The Times and the A.C.L.U. also want to know more about the drone killing of an American teenager in Yemen, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, also shrouded in secrecy.

But The Times has not been without fault. Since the article in May, its reporting has not aggressively challenged the administration’s description of those killed as “militants” — itself an undefined term. And it has been criticized for giving administration officials the cover of anonymity when they suggest that critics of drones are terrorist sympathizers.