Analysis of the analysis of the 'analysts'

It's not every day that the Daily Inter Lake is cited in the New York Times, but that's just what happened in an April 20 story about the role of military analysts in wartime news coverage.

No, the Inter Lake was not lumped in with Fox News, MSNBC, CNN and the other networks as one of the big players in shaping public opinion about national policy. In fact, we were just as surprised to see our name in the article as anyone was.

Turns out that retired Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely of Bigfork, the host of the "Stand Up America" radio show, was one of the analysts featured in the 7,500-word story, which questioned whether America was being misled by these analysts "whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgment about the most pressing issues of the post-Sept. 11 world."

Reporter David Barstow summed up the problem he perceived as follows: "Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration's wartime performance, an examination by The New York Times has found."

In other words, military analysts with long military careers or Pentagon associations tend to support the current military in wartime. This to me is not news. In fact, anybody who spent a few minutes thinking about it would realize that the reason the networks want these guys as analysts is because they do have connections to the Pentagon. Inside information is the only kind of information that networks want to pay for.

Our readers and the readers of the New York Times can debate that point, of course, starting with an op-ed today by Franklin Schroeter of Somers which appears elsewhere on this page. For the record though, the Inter Lake doesn't have paid military analysts, and we usually rely on our own readers for their considerable insights on our opinion pages rather than turning to experts.

If on the other hand our readers are considered to be experts in their field, then we are doubly appreciative of their contributions. We certainly have our share of lawyers, doctors and government officials who contribute letters to the editor, as well as truck drivers, teachers, business owners, clerks - well, you get the idea. We also have, thanks to the retirement allure of the Flathead, more than our share of generals, including Gen. Vallely.

Vallely and his frequent co-author, retired Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney - another of the analysts mentioned in the Times article - have submitted many op-eds to the Inter Lake since 2005, of which we have run some if we thought they were of general interest (pun noted, but not intended). They almost invariably are on topics related to the war on terror, the war in Iraq or the Mideast in general. Their letters are welcome, as are the letters diametrically opposed to them by generals, veterans or just plain folks who oppose the war in Iraq, fear the Pentagon or despise the president. That, we think, is what makes our opinion section so diverse, lively and entertaining.

As for the citation of the Inter Lake by the New York Times, it wasn't exactly central to the story. In fact, it looks like the reporter combed through his list of news outlets looking for something low-key and out-of-the-way to use in comparison to the trumpet blare of Bill O'Reilly when writing about how the military analysts were viewed by the Pentagon.

"[T]he analysts' news media appearances were being closely monitored," Barstow wrote. "The Pentagon paid a private contractor, Omnitec Solutions, hundreds of thousands of dollars to scour databases for any trace of the analysts, be it a segment on 'The O'Reilly Factor' or an interview with The Daily Inter Lake in Montana, circulation 20,000."

Not exactly a claim to world fame for us, but we will certainly accept the mention gladly. After all, I have mentioned the New York Times on more than one occasion, so they owe me.

As for the story the Times referred to, it was a 2005 interview with Gen. Vallely, who at that time was a prominent face on Fox News and still a stranger to most of his neighbors in Bigfork. We wrote a story called "In the Loop," that profiled Vallely as one more of the many people who fell in love with the Flathead on their first visit and decided to move here.

As the title implies, there was no confusion about why Vallely was a valued military analyst. He was "in the loop" because of his long career in the Army and it was noted that when not at home working on his books, he was "jetting off to meet sources from Beirut to Israel to the Pentagon."

The immediate occasion of the story was that Vallely had just returned from a visit to Guantanamo and was being widely quoted in the national media. We thought it appropriate to let our readers know about Vallely's local connection, and asked reporter Candace Chase to do a story on the general.

Clearly, that which came as a shock to the New York Times - the general's close association with the Pentagon - was not being withheld from the Inter Lake's readers. In addition to talking about Vallely's sources in the Pentagon, Chase's article also explicitly spoke of Vallely riding to Guantanamo on the Secretary of the Navy's plane "with other media and congressional representatives."

As for his "appearance of objectivity," Vallely told us "I have no other agenda than to win the war on terror."

If the New York Times thinks that is biased, then perhaps that explains why the Pentagon thought it was important to get their message out through an alternative means than the mainstream media. But ultimately, as the failure to maintain public support for the war shows, the problem is not that the administration worked too hard to "sell" the war to the public, but that it didn't work hard enough.

If the president and the Pentagon believe that going to war is the right decision for our national security, then they had better darn well be prepared to convince us they are right. Otherwise, the casualties, costs and consequences of war will inevitably pile up and "enterprises of great pitch and moment," as Shakespeare phrased it in another context, will "lose the name of action."

. Frank Miele is managing editor of the Daily Inter Lake and writes a weekly column. E-mail responses may be sent to edit@dailyinterlake.com