Army commander ejects Stars & Stripes reporter in Mosul

Tue, 06/23/2009 - 1:09pm

What's up with Col. Gary Volesky? He had a pretty good reputation among reporters I knew in Baghdad. He's also a well-respected commander, receiving the Silver Star for a rescue mission in Sadr City back in 2004. But lately he has had an ugly run-in with an embedded reporter for Stars & Stripes.

According to the newspaper, Stripes reporter Heath Druzin's major sin was the "refuse to highlight" the good news in Iraq, as perceived by Volesky's public affairs officer. Also, Volesky asserts, Druzin asserted that he had the right to refuse to answer questions about stories he was working on. To be clear: Volesky has the right to ask, and Druzin does indeed have the right to decline to answer. It's a great country. 

The Best Defense's counsel: Col. Volesky needs to get a little perspective here. You may not always like what a reporter writes, but you are putting your life on the line to defend his ability to do it. Don't go picking and choosing reporters. Invite Druzin back in, have a heart-to-heart with him, and move on.

I know it is hard for the Army to accept this, but one of the most important journalistic freedoms we have is the right to be wrong. No one is right all the time, and sometimes it is the lonely dissident voice that pisses off everyone else that turns out to be right. Otherwise we'd still have slavery and various other flaws in our system.  

Volesky's move is especially bad because Stars & Stripes lately has been covering the Iraq war outside Baghdad almost solo. It isn't like ejecting one reporter back during the invasion, when the media hordes were present. 

Thomas E. Ricks | Permalink | | Comments? Login or register
( filed under: )


Advertisement

 

Perhaps it would be useful if

by Rubber Ducky on Tue, 06/23/2009 - 2:08pm

Perhaps it would be useful if this cat and other mid-grade & senior Army types were to read the First Amendment (or, if the Amendment's plain language baffles them, have it explained to them). After all, they've sworn an oath to defend it...

What do we expect?

by Don Bacon on Tue, 06/23/2009 - 2:11pm

There's that old expression, military reporting is to journalism as military music is to music. Okay, I made it up. The original expression referred to justice, which Heath Druzin failed to receive.

Didn't USED TO BE the only...

by Da Buffalo Amon... on Tue, 06/23/2009 - 3:36pm

Early on, Knight-Ridder had stringers all over Iraq.

Now apparently we have to depend on a 'house organ' news organization

What they don't tell you

by jdp7150 on Wed, 06/24/2009 - 8:51am

I get so sick of this kind of stuff. The fact is (And I know this is first hand) that Heath overheard people talking that were not part of any interview. He then published this info out of context and then denied it was not at an interview when one never happened. It would be like overhearing two people in the grocery store and publishing it and then swearing that these people were in an interview. The fact is that the 3-1 CAV did a horrible job of explaining why he wasn't allowed back by Heath is the most unprofessional reporter seen in Iraq in a long time. He has taken photos that people asked him not to publish because they endangered the lives of certain people. What did he do??? He published them and then blamed it on his editors for them being published. Things like this make me angry. Look at all of the embeds in Mosul at this very moment. There are TONS of them. And Stars and Stripes wasn't being banned just this one person who the unit felt was sooooo unprofessional that he should not be back. Stars and Stripes is a joke by the way. Here is a magazine that's only readership is the military who recieves the paper for FREE but yet they act like they are the enemy in this "War for Truth". This is a joke. All the other major outlets travel around the country with no problem but because this guy is a crap journalist it is somehow an international conspericy against this joke of a paper.

Not so fast

by tom ricks on Wed, 06/24/2009 - 10:11am

Once again we have a case of someone hiding behind anonymity to attack a person by name. I am losing patience with this but don't know what to do about it.

The "facts" stated above by JDP7150 should not be accepted at face value, because Stars & Stripes disputes them.

That said, even if they were true: Part of having a free press is having a press free to make mistakes. So my bottom line for you, JDP7159, is think about why the American system works.

Tom: Spot on.

by Rubber Ducky on Wed, 06/24/2009 - 10:57am

Tom: Spot on.

Is it possible that the press member was wrong?

by jrkcall on Thu, 06/25/2009 - 8:44am

Some free flow thoughts from a generally liberal-minded soldier with Brigade-level experience in Iraq:

Perhaps free speech trumps all; then all other considerations are irrelevant and what a reporter chooses to publish should never be questioned nor their methods, presence or access limited. I don’t believe it and suspect that most others don’t believe it either. There are morals and ethics involved in the profession of reporting (or should be) and some individuals do not comply with those.

I have read all the policy quotes in S&S describing why this decision was bad for the US Army. I also know the Army generally bends over backwards to avoid negative perceptions and stories. So I ask why this decision was made and supported: 1. By a Brigade Cdr well regarded by most press members; 2. In an environment when press coverage is generally sought; 3. Involving a press organization (S&S) that is almost exclusively providing all coverage outside Baghdad.

All these things suggest the commander and the Army would be overly cautious of offending and even bend over backwards to accommodate when conflicts occur. Could it be that there was a good reason for this refusal? I am not so blind as to believe all military commanders are anti-press; nor so blind as to believe that all press members are honest and objective in their reporting methods. When they are not, I for one will certainly refuse to work with them.

More to the Story

by ROKdrop on Sat, 06/27/2009 - 8:45am

There has got to be more to this story for this unit to ban a Stars & Stripes reporter. I have heard a lot of good things about COL Volesky and something had to have happened for him to refuse to have this guy rejoin the unit.

If this guys presence is going to interfere with the conduct of the unit, I don't see what the big problem is by S&S just sending another reporter?