Read Seymour Hersh with a Grain of Salt

Meanwhile, the Syrian propaganda machine has been long waiting for Hersh’s piece in the hopes that such a story would only confirm all that Syrian journalists and Syria’s politicians in Lebanon, like Aoun, had been arguing since March 2007.

The Hersh story will probably run in The New Yorker soon, and might be an update of his earlier rumor-based article on Hariri’s funding of terrorism. But before the Hersh piece is out, his readers in the United States and the Middle East should keep in mind how Hersh works, in his own words and as was reported in The Guardian.

The British daily asked Hersh whether his sources are people he has known for a long time. “No,” said Hersh, “I do pick up new people.” According to The Guardian story, this Hersh tactic is flawed for “with new contacts… there is always the danger of a plant,” meaning some people might want to distort a certain Hersh report and influence it by presenting false witnesses, which was probably the case during Hersh’s last trips to Lebanon and Syria.

In Beirut, Hersh is known for his strong links with former Information Minister Michel Samaha, who is in turn known for his staunch loyalty to the Assad regime through Assad’s political and media advisor former minister Buthayna Shaaban. Samaha is also known for his hostility toward the March 14 Coalition, including Hariri. In addition to his ties to Hersh, Samaha is believed to be supervising an invisible Lebanese-Syrian propaganda network.

According to The Guardian, Hersh’s critics also point “to what they regard as his excessive use of unnamed sources. Others accuse him of getting things wrong and of being gullible.” The British daily argues: “A low point came in the Nineties, when he embarked on a book about Kennedy, The Dark Side of Camelot. Hersh was shown documents that alleged the President was being blackmailed by Marilyn Monroe, and though he discovered that they were fake in time to remove all mention of them from his book, the damage to his reputation had already been done - and the critics let rip anyway, for his excitable portrayal of JFK as a sex addict and bigamist.”

There was also the time in 1974, The Guardian reports, when Hersh “accused the US ambassador to Chile, Edward Korry, of being in on a CIA plot to overthrow President Allende. Some years later, Hersh had to write a long correction; it ran on page one of the New York Times.”

The list of Hersh’s inaccurate reports can fill pages. In some cases, he filed corrections. In other cases, harm was done and he simply looked the other way.

At least in the case of Lebanon, one can be certain that Hersh will never apologize to Hariri, should Hersh be proven wrong, for the loyalty of this American reporter stretched beyond accurate reporting. Hersh is a fan of Middle Eastern dictatorships that he believes are standing to the United States, such as Iran and Syria.

Finally, the United States might be opposed to those pretending to command the Shiites in Lebanon and Iran, but it has certainly befriended the Shiites of Iraq, a fact that does not fit Hersh’s hypothesis and which he, conveniently, leaves out of his interview with Gorani.

When Hersh’s new story is out in The New Yorker and you read it, do not think of him as the Pulitzer Prize winner investigative journalists, just think of the many mistakes and intended omissions he makes, perhaps seeking more attention for his stories.

When you read the coming Hersh story, do so with a grain of salt.

 1  |  2