To the editor:
I write in response to Samuel Pennell’s April 25 letter titled “Aiding the enemy,” in which he accuses The Times Record of: being a member of the liberal press; siding with al-Qaida; demoralizing the American military; and printing propaganda.
His response is related to the reporting of photographs depicting U.S. forces urinating on and posing with corpses of the enemy.
It has always been my understanding that the role of a free press is to report the facts. Unless Mr. Pennell has substantiated evidence that the photos are doctored, then The Times Record has reported objectively and it is not disseminating propaganda.
As for the notion that The Times Record is responsible for demoralizing the military, it seems that in this case the pictured military members need to accept responsibility for that, as I doubt that defiling enemy corpses is official military policy.
I am, however, sympathetic to members of our combat forces who have served multiple rotations to the Middle East, been exposed to horrific violent engagements and witnessed the deaths of their comrades all too frequently.
Given the same exposures, I cannot say that I would not be guilty of a similar act.
As a long-term subscriber to The Times Record, I can honestly report that I have never read anything that causes me to think that the paper is sympathetic to al- Qaida or any other enemy of this country. What the paper is likely guilty of is not being sympathetic to the reporting practices of Rupert Murdoch and his ilk.
A healthy democracy does not evolve by ignoring the truth no matter how uncomfortable it causes its citizens to feel. What this country could use is more comprehensive investigative reporting and less hyperbole.
By the way, I suspect the notion of a “liberal press” is largely a myth perpetuated by conservative think tanks. After all, it was President Reagan and later President George H.W. Bush who vetoed legislative attempts that would have reinstated the Fairness Doctrine, which required the Federal Communications Commission to enforce fair and balanced reporting within its domain.
John Graham
Woolwich
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less