The Army and its (handpicked) journalists

Stars & Stripes, the national and widely respected newspaper that covers military affairs, is reporting on the Army’s effort (now theoretically canceled) to screen journalists seeking access to the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

According to S&S, an outside consultant was hired to compile detailed profiles of journalists, assessing the likelihood that their coverage would be “positive,” “negative,” or “neutral.”

In at least two of the profiles, copies of which were obtained by Stars and Stripes, Rendon [the outside contractor] clearly stated the purpose of the analysis was to help military public affairs officers determine what kind of coverage to expect from the journalist, whether to grant their embed request, and if that journalist could be steered toward “positive” coverage for the military.

On Friday, a public affairs officer with the 101st Airborne Division said that when his unit was in Afghanistan and in charge of the Rendon contract, he had used the conclusions contained in Rendon profiles in part to reject at least two journalists’ applications for embeds.

As the war in Afghanistan escalates, Americans will need as much information about the conflict as possible.

This is crucially important here in the North Country, where Fort Drum and National Guard service-members have ties to so many families.

Obviously, the Army has a right to complain when stories are factually inaccurate or biased — military public information officers aren’t shy people.

But this kind of thing seems to come very close to outright censorship. Your thoughts?

Tags: military