July 08, 2004

ULI DEMANDS UN INSPECTION

Good to see that our old pal Uli Schmetzer isn’t over-reacting to his dismissal and subsequent investigation by the Chicago Tribune:

The rush into action, my public identification and vilification as an apparent "serial liar" bore an uncanny similarity with Washington’s unholy rush into the Iraqi War, without allowing the U.N. inspectors to first verify if the suspected presence in Iraq of WMDs and Al Qaeda links really existed.

Was it ethical or was it hypocritical for the Tribune to launch an apparently open-ended inquiry into one journalist’s one-time "so far" peccadillo (which did no harm to anyone) while the paper published, without verification, part of the New York Times series on the presence of WMDs in Iraq ... ?

Did no harm to anyone? Uli, man, you libelled a whole country.

(Via Bill Herbert)

Posted by Tim Blair at July 8, 2004 06:09 PM
Comments

Mmmmm. Roast Bilby. With Chocolate sauce.

Just like Chicken, only Endangered.

Posted by: Robert Blair at July 8, 2004 at 06:35 PM

Apparently he's been studying at the Micah Wright School of Public Relations.

Posted by: Jim Treacher at July 8, 2004 at 07:07 PM

Allow me to outline a little bit of Uli's rant:

without allowing the U.N. inspectors to first verify if the suspected presence in Iraq of WMDs and Al Qaeda links really existed.

Can someone explain to me how Uli expected weapons inspectors to investigate suspected terrorist links?

Posted by: Quentin George at July 8, 2004 at 08:27 PM

Give it up Uli, you were exposed as a hack who couldn't even lie your way into a good story. Time to accept it and move on.

Posted by: John at July 8, 2004 at 09:57 PM

In the world Uli, and others, inhabit he did no wrong. In that world it's OK to create a quote if it exposes the evil of racism. He just *knew* the racism existed, therefore creating a quote wasn't a bad thing.

It's situational ethics some journalists (and many others) adhere to. In their deluded minds a GREATER good is being served by their dishonesty. They are probably wondering why they aren't rewarded more for the good they feel they do.

Too bad they are unable to see all the harm they do. Instead, they see *themselves* as victims. People who value truth over ideology and belief are not understood by these sorts of people.

Posted by: Chris Josephson at July 8, 2004 at 10:47 PM

Treacher--Yeah, except Uli can't go back and erase things he wrote in the past.

Posted by: Sortelli at July 9, 2004 at 12:33 AM

It always amazes me how dishonest people can excuse their dishonesty by pointing fingers at other people.

"Yeah, I'm a lying scumbag, but those guys are worse!"

Posted by: Rebecca at July 9, 2004 at 01:29 AM

Then there's the Krugman Doctrine, which will be taught in schools of jounalism: If one is telling Essential Truths, and one has a Correct point of view, then little details like libel, slander, and lying are irrelevant.

Posted by: Ernie G at July 9, 2004 at 01:38 AM

Uli has some set of balls. Not only does he try to defend himself by belittling the Tribune editors, but he then compares the editors to the Spanish Inquisition? Later he tosses out that his Trib co-workers were secretly admirerers of Joe McCarthy looking to "get him".

After reading this letter about his illustrious 25 year career, 3000 story submissions, why would he resign over something so simple as protecting a source by changing their name? Surely an editor would be upset with this neglect, but would they have investigated all 3,000 stories because of it?

If he wants to compare critics to the Spanish Inquisition I might as well give him a real taste of the Spanish Inquisition and show up at his door every morning to bruise his legs so he can no longer walk. Of course, until he toes my "corporate moralist" line.

Posted by: Brennan Stout at July 9, 2004 at 01:38 AM

"Treacher--Yeah, except Uli can't go back and erase things he wrote in the past."

Rule #1 of any conversation with Micah Wright: Save it all to your hard drive.

Posted by: Jim Treacher at July 9, 2004 at 04:44 AM