By
J.F. Mezo
Photo by Seth Anderson: https://www.flickr.com/photos/swanksalot/
NEW
YORK, Oct. 31 – Seymour M. Hersh’s investigative essay, ‘The Killing of Osama
bin Laden’ offers a clear look into the controversy surrounding the death of
Al-Qaeda’s former leader. In order to build a complex picture, Hersh
investigates multiple aspects of the story and relies of various sources,
ranging from the official statements of the White House to allegation about the
mission that resulted in bin Laden’s death.
And while the wide variety of cited sources is undoubtedly one of the
main strengths of his work, the transparency of sourcing also makes it
generally easy for the reader to put the pieces of the puzzle into place.
However, Hersh also relies on
anonymous sources, a practice that is generally regarded as risky by
journalists, since by citing anonymous sources, the author effectively asks his
audience to trust that he was thorough in his investigation, putting his
credibility on the line. While it might seem like a real gamble to make, there
are certain situations when the journalist has no choice but to omit the names
of his sources in order to protect them – and, as most would agree, asking a
government official to provide details on how taking down the most famous
terrorist leader of our time was a premeditated act on the part of the American
government certainly calls for precautions.
On the other hand, Hersh does a good
job at establishing his sources’ credibility, since their status or (former)
position makes it entirely conceivable that they would have relevant information
about the case. His main anonymous source is cited as a retired senior US
intelligence official, and (while a bit less transparent) another anonymous
source is revealed to be a source within the CIA, while yet another is labelled
a former Seal commander. It is easy to imagine that people at such ranks would
have insider information about the operation, even more so since their claims
seem to be backed up by the former Secretary of Defence, Robert Gates, in his
memoir, Duty. Their motives for providing information,
however, remain largely unclear, which leaves room for speculations .
In his essay, Hersh also mentions a
couple of readily available sources and documents that the public can access,
for example the statements issued by the White House and the published personal
accounts of two navy Seals who participated in the operation, contrasting them
with the information provided by his sources. By doing so, he points those who
wish to read about the story in even greater detail towards useful resources,
which further increases his credibility.
To sum up, while the anonymity of
some of his most important sources might set the story back on certain levels, Hersh’s
efforts to establish the credibility of his sources and provide the reader with
the broadest possible scope inspires trust in his audience. Although using materials
provided by many different sources allows him to explore multiple aspects of
the story, his narration remains clear and easy to follow throughout the essay,
making his piece a must-read for those studying investigative journalism.
I love how you point out what Hersh does well; his sourcing practices in this specific case may be questionable, but his narration is indeed clear and he frames his argument very well.
ReplyDelete