Collaborationist or Resistance Fighter?

by Bob Patterson

This weekend the sudden death of NBC's Tim Russert will generate a number of ruminations about the meaning of a career in journalism. Ironically this comes immediately after the publication of Scott McClellan's book, which called journalists "complicit enablers" for their (on average) anemic job performance during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq

On Bill Moyers Journal on PBS on June 6, 2008, Jonathan Landay lamented the fact that the press has not expressed regret about their role helping President Bush sell the WMD's rational for a war with Iraq. He said: "What's disappoints me is that here was an opportunity, once again, but a very large opportunity for major news organizations to do the mea culpa they never did, to admit that they indeed failed to do what they're supposed to do, failed to be the watchdogs they're supposed to be.

Dennis Miller interviewed Vincent Bugliosi about his new book, The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, during the second hour of his radio program on Wednesday. June 11, 2008, and in the course of the banter Miller asked the author if the author thought that the radio host was an accessory to any possible crime by Bush. Miller wanted to know: If Bush was guilty of murder (as the book asserts), then should Miller be considered an accessory to the crime?

Since Albert Camus was a journalism critic, the editor of Combat newspaper, and a resistance fighter in Paris during the German occupation, a column speculating about how Camus would have responded to these three different items, seems like a way to write a column for this weekend that won't be full of "second the motion" sentiments.

If a journalist provides propaganda encouraging a war criminal leader, wouldn't Camus say that such support qualifies the journalist to be labeled as a collaborator?

- more -