W. Thomas Smith
I won’t try to give a recap of the entire controversy, but Thomas Edsall has a good one, and from the right, Malkin. This incident, where a NRO blogger made up stories about 5,000 Hezbollah fighters entering a Christian section of Beirut, which according to other journalists in Lebanon would have been an international news story and could have easily incited violence, is, of course, obviously will be compared with the Beuchamp/TNR snafu.
There is next to no resemblance, however. Beauchamp was doing narrative, first person reporting, and his only goal was to disclose his experiences of the war. Smith, on the other hand, was playing the role of a “real” journalist, informing his readers of developments in Lebanon. The fact that he was credulous enough to believe “reliable sources within the Cedar Revolution movement, as well as insiders within the Lebanese national security apparatus” and then report a major story (the 4,000 gunmen entering Christian Beirut) that no other journalist was aware of indicates that Smith is simply a lying, irrevocably biased and unprofessional individual.
He’s made it very clear that he hates Hezbollah, and moreover, doesn’t care that is stupid actions (like stealing a Hezbollah flag) probably endangered journalists. And while there is no problem with hating Hezbollah — especially as an ex Marine — it’s clear that he did everything to portray Hezbollah in an agressive, threatening life, at the expense of accuracy.
The contrast with Scott Thomas is clear. Franklin Foer, in his latest dispatch on the issue, admitted that the stories were impossible to verify, and thus he couldn’t stand by them. Smith’s stories, on the other hand, were fabricated and Kathryn-Jean Lopez was informed that Smith’s work was fishy six weeks ago. The fact that she still claims that he is a “reliable” reporter is pretty shocking.
PS – David Kenner, a journalist based in Lebanon, called out Smith’s BS weeks ago. Glenn Greenwald has probably the most complete summary of the entire issue.
