Reporter Tips Off The Military Over Marines' Conduct

By: Brian Montopoli
Topics: Media Issues

According to the Associated Press, "About a dozen Marines are being investigated for possible war crimes in connection with the deaths last year of 15 Iraqi civilians who were initially reported killed by a roadside bomb."

Why is Public Eye covering it? Because of this tidbit in the third paragraph of the piece: "the initial allegations of possible violations were brought to the attention of the military by a reporter in mid-February."

Unfortunately, there's no more information mentioned about the reporter's involvement, but the decision to tip off the military nonetheless raises questions about the role of a journalist in a war zone.

If he or she is there simply to report, then doesn't the reporter have an obligation to tell a story of alleged war crimes instead of simply letting the brass know about them? Or is the reporter doing the responsible thing if he or she holds a story that could inflame passions in the enemy?

It's difficult to speculate about this particular situation without more information, but this kind of story reminds us that there aren't always easy moral guidelines when it comes to war journalism. There are those who argued that it was wrong to show the photos from Abu Ghraib prison, for example, since they could in effect create terrorists. At the same time, most journalists believe that a healthy press, one that exposes the reality of a given situation, is essential to a functioning democracy. That argument is summed up in the words of Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice, who argues that "sunlight is the greatest disinfectant."

Both sides have a point. I hope we eventually find out more about the back story in this case so we can weigh the reporters' conduct against his obligations as a journalist and an American.

Brian Montopoli
Brian Montopoli is the senior political reporter at CBSNews.com.
Follow on Twitter »

7 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment


by peterbaldwin-2009 March 20, 2006 2:27 PM EST: American soldiers have nothing to fear from a War Crimes Tribunal. England and "ringleader" Graner would not even be in their sights. The Nuremburg trials involved high level officials. Even mid-level officers were passed over for the kingpins. Brian's statements about reporting to the "brass" is as risible as calling Graner a ringleader. Brian is but a Bushie cheerleader for the scapgoating of our fighting men. We are still waiting for him to tell us when he will be putting on a uniform. Rather, he will be grabbing the pom poms and a tu tu instead like his fearless mentors, Bush and Chaney.; Reply to this comment


by itsmetj March 20, 2006 12:01 AM EST: So when is the mainstream media going to give *us* some sunshine? later...; Reply to this comment


by flippper March 19, 2006 2:56 PM EST: Another Story You Don't Hear at CBS: Salt Lake City Tribune Anti-war protesters in Salt Lake City, elsewhere lament apathy Luciano Martinez and his wife, Peggy, of Murray, attend an anti-war rally Saturday in Salt Lake City. (Leah Hogsten/The Salt Lake Tribune) By the time the war protesters began their march Saturday morning in Salt Lake City, only about 50 people had gathered. Their numbers had swelled to about 200 by noon - and that was with a little high-tech help from a marcher who text-messaged friends to join him. The early low turnout was discouraging to some, such as Susan Westergard of Holladay. "There's just about more policemen here than people," said the Democratic candidate for the Utah House of Representatives in District 40, nodding to the squadron of eight motorcycle officers parked alongside 400 South. "I guess the longer the war goes on, the more people accept it." The protesters, organized by the People for Peace and Justice of Utah, marched from Pioneer Park to a rally on the steps of the City-County Building, where they listened to songs, speeches and chants condemning the war.; Reply to this comment


by jtdavies3 March 19, 2006 5:21 AM EST: You know, I'd feel more empathy with the press if they also embedded with the enemy and did as much reporting on their war crimes.; Reply to this comment


by bob___k March 18, 2006 8:22 AM EST: If you take the position that allegations are news, then you should be in favor of them being reported. Of course that position results in almost everything qualifying. The media already does too much of that type stuff. Why in the world would anyone want more of it? For use as some sort of jounalistic make work program? You ended with the phrase ... "so we can weigh the reporters' conduct against his obligations as a journalist and an American." I ask you. How are the obligations different? Also, how do you know the reporter is American? I didn't see it mentioned in the article.; Reply to this comment


by foobarbaz-2009 March 17, 2006 9:54 PM EST: The government is finally getting around to unloading some of Saddam Hussein's secret documents. A look at just a few pages already leads to some blockbuster revelations. In the early stages of the war that began three years ago, the U.S. captured thousands of documents from Saddam and his spy agency, the Mukhabarat. It's been widely thought the documents could shed light on why Saddam behaved as he did and how much of a threat his evil regime represented. Yet, until this week, the documents lay molding in boxes in a government warehouse. Now the first batch is out, and though few in number, they're loaded with information. Among the enduring myths of those who oppose the war is that Saddam, though murderous when it came to his own people, had no weapons of mass destruction and no terrorist designs outside his own country. Both claims now lie in tatters. It's funny that these documents are getting so little attention from the press.; Reply to this comment


by alphaa10-2009 March 17, 2006 8:19 PM EST: Military figures always claim they know best, and can perform best when unhampered by "micromanaging" civilian oversight. But time and again, civilians have learned the hard way that unchecked power-- like all power-- tends to corrupt. The field reporter in Iraq probably wrestled with such thoughts as he wondered how to handle what he observed. Merely informing the military authorities might have been enough-- but if they did not act on his information, the reporter also retained the option and duty to inform others of suspected crimes. Only a military fully aware of its responsibility to civilian authorities is likely to act in a manner both humane and responsible. If democracy depends on a chain of accountability, a system of checks and balances, then a truly free press and freedom of speech is absolutely vital. From Nazi Germany to the most dictatorial third-world state, the first institution to be subverted by would-be dictators is the military.; Reply to this comment