I consider the
Newshour on PBS to be the best of daily TV journalism and watch it religiously. So I was disheartened last night when the producers seriously violated the rules of responsible journalism.
Neocon prince Richard Perle appeared on a segment examining reports by the New Yorker's Sy Hersh and the WaPo that the Bush administration is contemplating military strikes, including the use of nuclear weapons, against Iran.
Perle, a fomer Reagan DoD official, chaired Rumsfeld's Defense Policy Board before resigning after Hersh in March 2003 reported on his possible conflicts of interest in the post. Infuriated by Hersh's reporting, Perle threatened to sue the veteran investigative journalist for libel -- in England! But the suit, like the WMDs in Iraq that Perle hyped before the war, never materialized.
Several times during the Newshour segment, Perle attacked Hersh's credibility, but host Margaret Warner never mentioned Perle's history with Hersh.
Indeed, Perle seemed more intent on attacking Hersh than in explaining or refuting his reporting on Bush administration planning on Iran.
I do not believe that we are contemplating the offensive use of nuclear weapons, for example, which was the sensationalism in Mr. Hersh's article that's now gone all around the world.
Former State Department official Morton Halperin, the other segment guest, stood up for Hersh.
I take the story very seriously. Sy Hersh's reporting over the last few years and all the way back has been extraordinarily accurate, and I think it would be a mistake to discount those stories.
But Halperin's defense drew this rejoinder from Perle:
Look, I think there's just a lot of hyperbole here. We are not contemplating the use of nuclear weapons. It is widely irresponsible and wrong for Sy Hersh to suggest we are. And far from having been accurate in the recent past, he's been wildly inaccurate on any number of occasions.
But the idea that we should now be put in the position of having to offer assurances that would appear to validate the claim because one irresponsible journalist makes unreasonable charges I think is - would be very foolish.
Perle is a compelling talking head, no doubt about it. He seems the embodiment of evil. With eyes sunken into dark sockets in his fleshy face, he has the mug of a ghoul and the demeanor of a snake who's just swallowed a pig - whole. And he has a razor-sharp tongue that he uses to intimidate and slash those who disagree with him.
What Perle does not have is credibility. He and his neocon cronies were catastrophically wrong about Iraq, and only fools would believe anything they say about Iran. Not only was Perle wrong about Iraq, but as Hersh reported, he was in a position to possibly profit from the war while sitting on Rumsfeld's Defense Policy Board.
I have great respect for the Newshour. But I believe it was a mistake to book Perle as a guest, and irresponsible to allow him to take free shots at Hersh without detailing the history between the two. The Newshour owes its audience an explanation.