The Real Emboldenment Effect

11:39 pm EST March 25th, 2008 | Media, Terrorism | 3 Comments

If there is a crackpot theory about Iraq to be pushed, you can be sure Glenn Reynolds will be on the front lines of it. This go-around is about some study showing a correlation between terrorist emboldenment and access to the western press. But you know what really emboldens terrorists?

Stupid presidents, other moronic leaders who initiate and encourage retarded policies and encourage illegal wiretapping and surveillance contrary to 200+ years of U.S. moral authority… and the right-wing pundits, spinners, writers and media “analysts” who get down on their knees and provide comfort.

Islamic terrorism has had no greater friend to its growth and lethality than the Republican party, the conservative movement, and their policies.

Topic: , , ,

Related Posts

«
»

3 Responses to “The Real Emboldenment Effect”

  1. Quaker in a Basement says:
    March 26, 2008 at 12:44 am

    Reynolds is such a dishonest guy.

    He writes this:

    MEDIA SLANT, TERRORISTS, AND the emboldenment effect. “Researchers at Harvard say that publicly voiced doubts about the U.S. occupation of Iraq have a measurable ‘emboldenment effect’ on insurgents there.”

    His link leads to James Taranto’s “Best of the Web,” with a summary of the Harvard study and a link to the actual text of the study.

    Of course, the study says exactly nothing about “media slant.” And Reynolds says exactly nothing about who is making the “emboldening” statements.

    Here’s how the authors of the study measured emboldening statements:

    we construct an automated mentions count of potentially
    “emboldening” statements reported in major U.S. news outlets, which we define as the number of times top Bush administration officials—the President, Vice-President, Secretary of Defense,
    Secretary of State, Press Secretary, and the U.S. commander Iraq—    refer to statements or actions by other U.S. political figures that might encourage violent extremist groups in Iraq

    In short, the “emboldening statements” counted for the study are those in which the Bush administration accuses somebody else of “emboldening the enemy.”

    The irony is rich and deep.

  2. fafaroo says:
    March 26, 2008 at 3:42 am

    I tried reading through the report but stopped when i hit the equations. I’m no statistician, but whenever the administration highlights something as “emboldening the enemy” don’t they always through in something “resolve” and “staying the course”? The report makes several mentions of “resolve statements” by the administration, but i’ll be damned if i could figure out what they were actually saying they found.

    All in all, the Right will claim this, whatever the actual findings and intent of the study, as a reason to silence criticism of the administration and its policies. I’d chalk that up as a victory for the terrorists.

  3. merlallen says:
    March 26, 2008 at 5:04 am

    george bush was the best thing to ever happen to Osama binLaden and vice versa.