Front page of the Albuiquerque Tribune yesterday: "President outlines failed '02 L.A. attack." The story reports President Bush said "The terroistsd are living under constant pressure and this adds to our security." A bit further down, he says, "The terrorists are weakened and fractured, and yet they are lethal."
Got that? OK.
Back page of the Albuquerque Tribune's first section yesterday: "Stats: Insurgents gain steam." The GAO statistics say, in summary, that insurgent attacks have grown over the last three years. "It;s not going down. there are peaks and valleys but if you look at every peak, it's higher than the peak before." That's from Joseph christoff of GAO, testifying before Senate Foreign Relations.
No, the GAO report does not directly contradict the President's statemnts. But it sure casts some doubt on them. Which prompts this question - are newspapers doing enough to extract meaning from their hard news reports?
Imagine, for example, if the front-page and back-page stories were layed out side-by-side?
Something to think about....