Media Lens get back to lying again
From The First Post:
How many know that leading epidemiologist Les Roberts recently estimated that between 200,000 and 300,000 Iraqi civilians may have been killed since the invasion? Roberts argues that the most commonly cited source for Iraqi civilian casualties - amateur website Iraq Body Count (IBC) - may have captured less than five per cent of the true total.
Roberts recently said of an IBC report defending its work: "I discussed it with some of my co-authors. We decided that it was so devoid of credibility, and so laden with self-interest rather than the interest of the Iraqis, it did not merit a response."
Cromwell & Edwards continue their campaign of disinformation about Iraq Body Count.
Let's highlight the lies here:
I'll do them a favour by using the highest figure quoted: (300,000 / 100) * 5 = 15,000
IBC's counter "recently" stated a minimum figure (again doing them a favour) of 35,000 or so.
That seems to be more than 5 per cent. Looks like mathematics isn't The Editors strong point...
And, to back up the credibility of our leading epidemiologist (and trash IBC's) they quote a "context-free" sentence from a hissy fit that Les Roberts had on the Media Lens Forum (that hardly anybody reads).
What a pair of wankers.
In case you are thinking that their words were distorted in any way:
We sent the letter and the editor agreed to publish it and also offered us 600 words for an article. We had full editorial control of the article.
--The Editors, describing their article in The First Post, July 4, 2006, 11:45 am
As the Media Lens Message Board is populated by intelligent and diligent researchers, you'd expect somebody would quickly point out this glaring error in their "Media Truth". Let's see how long it takes by clicking here to monitor the thread on their Message Board.
Media Lens truth is not the whole truth.
How many know that leading epidemiologist Les Roberts recently estimated that between 200,000 and 300,000 Iraqi civilians may have been killed since the invasion? Roberts argues that the most commonly cited source for Iraqi civilian casualties - amateur website Iraq Body Count (IBC) - may have captured less than five per cent of the true total.
Roberts recently said of an IBC report defending its work: "I discussed it with some of my co-authors. We decided that it was so devoid of credibility, and so laden with self-interest rather than the interest of the Iraqis, it did not merit a response."
Cromwell & Edwards continue their campaign of disinformation about Iraq Body Count.
Let's highlight the lies here:
I'll do them a favour by using the highest figure quoted: (300,000 / 100) * 5 = 15,000
IBC's counter "recently" stated a minimum figure (again doing them a favour) of 35,000 or so.
That seems to be more than 5 per cent. Looks like mathematics isn't The Editors strong point...
And, to back up the credibility of our leading epidemiologist (and trash IBC's) they quote a "context-free" sentence from a hissy fit that Les Roberts had on the Media Lens Forum (that hardly anybody reads).
What a pair of wankers.
In case you are thinking that their words were distorted in any way:
We sent the letter and the editor agreed to publish it and also offered us 600 words for an article. We had full editorial control of the article.
--The Editors, describing their article in The First Post, July 4, 2006, 11:45 am
As the Media Lens Message Board is populated by intelligent and diligent researchers, you'd expect somebody would quickly point out this glaring error in their "Media Truth". Let's see how long it takes by clicking here to monitor the thread on their Message Board.
Media Lens truth is not the whole truth.
posted by g33kThug at 1:37 AM
<< Home