Airstrip One

Why trust the papers?

As a former Telegraph devotee I get distressed when I see my old daily read being proved time and again to be not just wrong, but intentionally so. Is it possible to trust it at all?

The latest episode is from the European Foundation Intelligence Digest:

One of the main "insiders" called by the prosecution in the case against the former Yugoslav president, Slobodan Miloševic, Rade Markovic, testified at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague last week - and proudly proclaimed his former boss innocent. Prior to his appearance, Markovic was welcomed in the press as the man who would finally provide proof that Miloševic had ordered acts of ethnic cleansing and other atrocities. He had served as Head of the Secret Services under Miloševic and was expected, as such, to provide crucial testimony. Marc Temo of Libération, for instance, said that "to date, no such an important insider has come to testify". [Libération, 26th July 2002] But when Markovic did testify, the reaction of the press was distinctly frosty. Most news outlets reported the fact that Markovic confirmed that Miloševic controlled the army and the police, the Daily Telegraph even running articles entitled "Miloševic knew of Kosovo atrocities". This was exactly the opposite of what Markovic said. Not only did he explicitly deny receiving any orders to ethnically cleanse Kosovo or to commit any acts of violence against the civilian population, Markovic testified that he "told (local officials) that presidential orders are that the flow of refugees must be stopped," [Associated Press, 26th July 2002].

Etc, etc.