Influencing Our Analysts: A Crisis in Trust and Credibility

Last Sunday, the front page of the New York Times included a story about the efforts of the Pentagon's public affairs operation to influence retired military officers now working as military analysts for some of our nation's largest media organizations.

I am very angry about the issues raised by the New York Times' story, as are many of my colleagues who have called me aside to discuss it. The story does not reflect well on the Pentagon, on the military analysts in question, or on the media organizations that employ them.

Maybe I am too idealistic, but this story is appalling to me on a number of levels. For me, it all comes down to trust and credibility. And it would be a dangerous thing for the American people to lose trust in the Pentagon, in our retired officer corps, and in the press, each of which has a critical role to play in preserving our nation's freedoms.

Through the years, I have frequently urged our military services to improve their efforts to tell America about the good work that is being done by our country's sons and daughters in uniform. Our military services have an important story to tell, and public affairs offices are critical to that task. But credibility is paramount. Once lost, it is difficult or impossible to regain.

There is nothing inherently wrong with providing information to the public and the press. But there is a problem if the Pentagon is providing special access to retired officers and then basically using them as pawns to spout the administration's talking points of the day. There are allegations that analysts who failed to deliver the message required by the administration mysteriously lost access to future briefings and information. I find this deeply troubling. We deserve to be able to trust the actions of the Pentagon.

We also deserve a retired officer corps that is worthy of the respect it receives from the American people, who place great faith in their judgment and loyalty to our nation. Americans trust our active duty and retired military, and rightly so.

I know a number of the retired officers employed by the media as military analysts to be honorable people. But the special access they are alleged to have received and the circumstances of their employment, without proper disclosure of their outside interests or biases, raise a number of uncomfortable questions that deserve serious answers.

Which master do these analysts serve?

The United States Government, which supplies their retirement pay?

The Pentagon, which may reduce the amount of analysis they actually need to do by providing detailed talking points promoting the current administration's message agenda?

The defense contractors, who pay them for serving on boards or for their defense expertise, and perhaps more to the point, for their Pentagon connections?

Will their analysis, either by design or just by lucky coincidence, result in contracts or other advantages for the companies from which they take home a paycheck?

It hurts me to my core to think that there are those from the ranks of our retired officers who have decided to cash in and essentially prostitute themselves on the basis of their previous positions within the Department of Defense. I would hate to think that because a few people have blurred ethical boundaries and cashed in on their former positions that we might tarnish the military's hard won reputation for professionalism and objectivity and love of country first and foremost.

Finally, I think our media have a serious responsibility to disclose potential conflicts of interest when they do their reporting. This applies to all of their stories, of course, and not just those that include retired officer military analysts. I understand that different organizations have different rules, but perhaps it would not be out of order for our journalism schools and professional journalism organizations to develop ethical guidelines for dealing with such issues.

Our nation's military exists to protect America's freedoms for citizens today and for future generations. The First Amendment guarantees the right of all Americans, including retired service members and members of the press, to speak freely and without restraint. But with our rights come responsibilities to act honestly and ethically. I have no doubt we will continue to discuss these matters in the days ahead.

Comments

[mbaty]

It was obvious there was a bias by the way people were throwing out "Al Quedas" as a blanket label for all terrorists or terrorist activity, but this is seriously duplicitous. Then again, these are people who have spent their lives in an institution that teaches people to kill. Lying isn't a terribly big jump, but that still doesn't cover the media broadcasting companies that enabled this to happen. If there ever was a "vast right-wing conspiracy" it started with the very manipulated events of 9/11 and continued from there. What little trust there was that these political leaders--and the outlets that cover them--had or have our best interests in mind, is gone. They've been crying "terrorist, Wolf!" for years now, when, in fact, they were the one's in sheep's clothing.

[oldpotsmuggler]

Sir, You conceptualize the situation too shallowly. You have persons on the federal payroll using their time on the job to openly and directly promote the political agenda of this foul Administration, and consequently to directly communicate a political message to the electorate. ("The ordinary and probable consequence of their actions" is sufficient grounds to support a criminal prosecution even on an actual intent offense.) I believe that the name of the offense being commited is "violation of the Hatch Act", but in any even it is clearly criminal conduct and it simply does not help matters for you not to address it as such.

[testpilot84]

As a retired military officer, I am appalled that you call our ethics into question.

You'll find the rare officer that embarasses us through selfish, untrustworthy behaviour, but with these VERY FEW exceptions, our ethics and integrity are well above those of the media and many in Congress.

No one (except Congress) can affect my retirement pay. I am beholden to no one for it and I will not be questioned based on such feeble evidence.

I have found such a lack of a work ethic and integrity in civilian life (compared to my time in the military) that I now seek ex-military (and their family members) to work for our small business. I can count on them, almost as much as I can count on the media to bash us at every opportunity.

[billysviez]

testpilot84, of course not all retired Officers go this way. however, there are enough of them to destroy Our trust and any dumbass can see the Military and Intelligence Service have been taken over by the traitors in Congress and the cheney, bush Admin. i'm a retired Enlisted Vietnam Vet. and i can see and FEEL the Facist State We are becoming.

[HeevenSteven]

Maybe you should read the NYT story before you shoot off your mouth.

[deminmo]

testpilot84,
You don't have to be military to have integrity. Having lots of
military vets in my family I grew up with knowing what integrity,
honesty, hard work and reliability meant. Maybe you are looking
for help in all the wrong places.
There is corruption in all aspects of life, military and civilian.

[legalgirl]

Thank you for your thoughtful and honest assessment. I find this passage particularly compelling:

"Maybe I am too idealistic, but this story is appalling to me on a number of levels. For me, it all comes down to trust and credibility. And it would be a dangerous thing for the American people to lose trust in the Pentagon, in our retired officer corps, and in the press, each of which has a critical role to play in preserving our nation's freedoms."

I share all of these feelings, but would hasten to add that I HAVE lost trust in these institutions. Ethical standards are great for ethical people. But the organizations and persons to whom you've referred (media, government) have not demonstrated trustworthiness or credibility during the course of that last 8 years. The public has been lied to or misled again and again, and it seems to be circular, one feeding the other.

In order to restore MY faith in any of it, effective change must occur--not just talk and window dressing. Since our regulatory agencies have been crippled, I would think it begins with prosecutions, once we have a functioning justice department. I'd also like to see laws about war-profiteering. I'll bet that if you take the profit out of it, the interest by a lot of the bad guys would go away. I'm sure others have thoughts on what needs to be done.

[scooperss]

I HAVE lost trust in these institutions.

Ditto

[caral]

"The story does not reflect well on the Pentagon, on the military analysts in question, or on the media organizations that employ them."

I agree with you here, but I find more fault with the media organizations for not asking the right questions of these analysts.

[DieboldHacker]

"And it would be a dangerous thing for the American people to lose trust in the Pentagon.."

That is about the funniest thing I have seen all day.