TMR Exclusive: W. Thomas Smith, Jr. Goes On The Record!
By Steve Foley - Posted on December 4th, 2007
Tagged: Op-Ed
With the growing controversy surrounding W. Thomas Smith, Jr's Lebanon reporting being fueled by the “Leftosphere” I thought it prudent to get his take on the matter, and let the man himself set the record straight. W. Thomas Smith, Jr goes on the record with TMR.
First some background, The usual suspects The Huffington Post’s Thomas B. Edsall and Glenn Greenwald, which by the way, Greenwald questioning anyone's integrity is a post unto itself - but I digress -- has accused W. Thomas Smith, Jr of "fabricating" his reporting of the situation in Lebanon. The two stories in question can be found Here and Here with NRO's Mea Culpa Here and Mr. Smith's A Note to Readers - Here
In a nutshell: While "blogging" from Lebanon Mr. Smith failed to accurately distinguish between what he saw with his own eyes and what his sources told him. NRO was challenged on it, they investigated, found sloppiness, and apologized.
Read On...
But of course that's not good enough for the left. And It's not totally unexpected as their side has been feverishly trying to find a right wing lying journalist to deflect the abomination that is Beauchamp and Blair.
The use of the word fabricated is completely wrong in this case the fact is, Smith was sloppy with his context and guilty of not accurately distinguishing between what he saw and what his sources told him.
Making stories up out of whole cloth (ala CBS, Beauchamp, and Blair) and not distinguishing between what he saw and what he was told are very different things. At the most Mr. Smith is guilty of "Sloppy blogging"!
Over the weekend the story continued to pick up steam so instead of listening to rumor and innuendo I thought I'd take a totally unorthodox approach, I asked the man himself.
The following is a short email interview with W. Thomas Smith, Jr.:
Steven Foley - while reporting in Lebanon were you on assignment? If yes, for whom?
W. Thomas Smith - I was on assignment for National Review Online.
Steven Foley - What is your relationship with National Review Online?
W. Thomas Smith - Freelance writer.
Steven Foley - Are the allegations that you fabricated the two Lebanon stories true?
W. Thomas Smith - No. I did not fabricate anything. First, there would be no reason for it. Second, I simply wouldn't or couldn't do it.
Steven Foley - Can I assume correctly that if anything your guilty of being sloppy with your context and guilty of not accurately distinguishing between what you saw and what your sources told you?
W. Thomas Smith - First of all, I'll not make excuses for my failure to adequately convey the specifics of what I was writing about. While in Lebanon, I reported what I saw, heard, and experienced. I also reported information gleaned from what I believed then -- and still believe to be -- reliable sources. And those sources were multiple.
I think you are correct in assuming: My blogging did not adequately "distinguish between" what I saw and what I learned from sources. Though I never said I "saw" specific numbers of people at any given place, I reported numbers based on what I was learning from sources.
Back in January of 2000, I a covered a protest march against the Confederate flag flying over the State House in Columbia, S.C. I was there. I saw what I saw. I heard what I heard. And I reported it. I also reported that 46,000 people marched in protest against the flag. Did I physically count 46,000 people? Hardly. No reporter there on that day did. We couldn't have. But we reported numbers, and those numbers were from what we believed to be reliable sources.
Steven Foley - Why in your opinion are other journalists questioning your integrity.
W. Thomas Smith - I'm not sure. I do, however -- as anyone in my situation would -- have one or two opinions why. But without knowing for sure, I feel it best to keep my opinions on that to myself.
But, no matter the reasons, I made it easy for my detractors because I was not specific enough in those blog entries.
Steven Foley - Finally what, if anything, would you like our readers to know about your integrity and the attacks that have been leveled at you regarding this issue?
W. Thomas Smith - That I place tremendous value on truth, because truth is something that in the end is unshakeable. Truth also transcends politics or ideology. There are truthful and untruthful people on both sides of the political fence. I also believe that just because we suspect someone to be untruthful, we should pay closer attention to what they are actually saying -- regardless of what we personally believe to be their motivations or their ideology -- because I honestly believe there are people who are inherently honest. Unfortunately, I think a lot of people believe that most everybody lies, so they are quick to level charges against people ... saying they are liars, fabricators, whatever. But I do believe there are lots of people who are simply honest no matter what.
For now I have to live with the cards I've been dealt, which again, some of the responsibilty for those cards has to be laid at my feet: My lack of specifics set me up for this.
But the fact that, in the end -- as I've just said -- truth being unshakeable is the one thing that comforts me. The downside is that rumors and allegations -- true or untrue -- can ruin you in this business because it creates doubt and destroys reputations.
I'm not sure what the future holds in this. But what I do know is that I will continue to march forward into it.
As it stands I see no malicious intent or, for that matter, any reason for Mr. Smith to lie or "fabricate" any of what he reported. Could I be wrong? Sure anything is possible not knowing the man personally I suppose he could be making the whole thing up but to what end?
This whole episode will more than likely turn out to be "Much Ado About Nothing" not that that will matter to the left. They've found someone to crucify, have locked targets, and it's full steam ahead! It's like I told Mr. Smith in our correspondence "from one Marine to another your word is good enough for me, unfortunately those on the left who get giddy at any hint of impropriety never enjoyed the pleasure of calling on a fellow leatherneck and knowing his or her word is impeccable due to a shared experience"
I realize I'm now going to bear the brunt of the “Leftosphere's” wrath with moonbats from everywhere criticizing my interview with charges of right wing favoritism and softball questions - so be it!
Submitted by Steve Foley on Tue, 2007-12-04 11:35.
Curt over at Flopping Aces has shared some very interesting reading material a piece written by John Hajjar, U.S. director for the World Council of the Cedars Revolution and Tom Harb, Secretary General of the International Lebanese Committee for UN Security Council Resolution 1559
Back in September, a reporter for National Review Online and former Marine, W. Thomas Smith Jr. landed in Beirut and began a three-week journey to report about the deeper end of Hezbollah’s deployment. Smith wasn’t the only American or European journalist who had crossed the psychological-warfare defense lines of Hezbollah and filed stories about the real situation, but he was the first reporter who is now under heavy fire from Hezbollah propagandists and their American mercenaries for having “penetrated” the second line of defense of Iranian propaganda in Lebanon.
The first line is when a journalist asks for Hezbollah’s permission to cover the organization but fails to follow the party line in his or her stories. The punishment is usually not to be granted another permission to walk in Hezbollah’s zones. But to those who come closer to the organization’s buildings, observe closely their urban movements, and never ask for any permission, the punishment is capital. Top dogs are unleashed against such journalists for the “kill” -- the moral, professional and political kill. Smith is today in the cross hair of the “mercenaries” who in turn deliver the blows from Hezbollah’s propagandists.
It was a matter of, “Smith reported too much: Let’s get him.”
So who is doing the attacking?
The “mob”
Leading the charge is Thomas B. Edsall from The Huffington Post. Edsall enlists Michael Prothero and Chris Allbritton, two journalists who have no real Middle East training but who at least went to Lebanon, and filed articles from there.
But readers would be amazed to learn who these writers are, and at whose service are their pens. This is precisely where readers will begin to understand that the attacks on Smith are in fact at the “service” of Hezbollah. Edsall – eager to score points on his political enemies in American politics (Bush and the conservatives) and in a rush to settle some scores with The National Review -- hastily hired two members of Hezbollah’s media mob who are all over the Internet defending the Iranian-funded militia. Instead of succeeding in nailing some sort of “victory” over Smith’s daring reporting, Edsall has opened a Pandora’s box on himself, Mrs. Huffington, and on the hidden media mercenaries, now fully exposed to the readers’ scrutiny on aiding Hezbollah against its victims.
So maybe some were a bit to overzealous with the piling-on?
Submitted by DocJ on Thu, 2007-12-06 07:08.
---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.
Submitted by gretske on Wed, 2007-12-12 11:04.
No where did either Katheryn Lopez or W. Thomas Smith recant or retract the story. All they did was to apologize for not sourcing it completely. This does not mean that either of them is saying the story is false, just that it was not properly quoted. To refute it, Tom Edsall quotes several journalists as saying it "could not be true."
But, where is their proof? They have none, except to say, "Uh-uh." Not very convincing My question is, why did the rest of the journalists supposedly stationed in Lebanon miss this?
Submitted by Steve Foley on Wed, 2007-12-12 11:12.
...articles 'Smith is a hero' and American Mercenaries of Hezbollah for the scoop on said journalists.
Submitted by Gordo on Thu, 2007-12-13 09:46.
WHY ISN'T THE TRUTH BEHIND HIS STORY BEING COVERED ?
WHERE IS HE WRITING NOW?
MR STEVE fOLEY, YOU AND OTHERS SHOULD LOOK INTO THIS.
Click Image to view the archive
The left is clearly looking to distract people from The New Republic and the Beauchamp implosion.