MoveOn.org ad controversy

File:PetraeusNYTad.jpg

The controversial full-page advertisement placed in the September 10, 2007 edition of The New York Times.

Anti-war liberal interest group MoveOn.org published a full-page ad in The New York Times on September 10, 2007 accusing General David H. Petraeus of “cooking the books for the White House”. The ad also labeled him "General Betray Us". The organization created the ad in response to Petraeus' Report to Congress on the Situation in Iraq.

Contents

Arguements

The ad argued:

• "Every independent report on the ground situation in Iraq shows that the surge strategy has failed."

The group later cited the GAO, NIE, and Jones reports published for Congress around the same time as Petraeus' report. USA Today compared the four report's findings. The validity of the benchmarks in measuring progress is disputed. The group referred to an Associated Press study finding that the civilian death toll in August 2007 was the second highest snce the surge began. The study also found that "monthly death tolls began to decline after the new security plan was launched" and "Deaths went down in Baghdad during August". The group also referred to a Los Angeles Times article stating that "the U.S. troop increase has had little effect."

• "Yet the General claims a reduction in violence. That’s because, according to the New York Times, the Pentagon has adopted a bizarre formula for keeping tabs on violence. For example, deaths by car bombs don’t count."

The group later referred to an editorial by liberal columnist Paul Krugman. Petraeus' report included data about car bombs.

• "The Washington Post reported that assassinations only count if you're shot in the back of the head -- not the front."

The Washington Post article anonymously quoted a "senior intelligence official in Washington" commenting on U.S. military data. The offical stated that "If a bullet went through the back of the head, it's sectarian" and "If it went through the front, it's criminal." The military explictly denies the assertion.

• "According to news reports, there have been more civilian deaths and more American soldier deaths in the past three months than in any other summer we’ve been there."

The group cited an Associated Press story stating that "This year’s U.S. troop buildup has succeeded in bringing violence in Baghdad down from peak levels, but the death toll from sectarian attacks around the country is running nearly double the pace from a year ago." The story also stated that "The U.S. military did not get all the additional American forces into Iraq until June 15, so it would be premature to draw a final statistical picture of the effect of the added troops." The group citied a NPR article quoting former Army Col. Doug MacGregor calling Petraeus' statistics "an illusion created by the White House". The article concluded by asking "So is the surge working? The short answer is that no one can know for certain because statistics only tell a small part of the story."

• "We'll hear of neighborhoods where violence has decreased. But we won't hear that those neighborhoods have been ethnically cleansed."

The group later cited a Newsweek story stating that "When Gen. David Petraeus goes before Congress next week to report on the progress of the surge, he may cite a decline in insurgent attacks in Baghdad as one marker of success. In fact, part of the reason behind the decline is how far the Shiite militias' cleansing of Baghdad has progressed: they've essentially won."

• "Iraq is mired in an unwinnable religious civil war."

As of September 19, the group has not cited any sources to support this statement.

• "General Petraeus has actually said American troops will need to stay in Iraq for as long as ten years."

The group later referred to a statement by Democratic Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky. The nonpartisan website Factcheck.org has criticized previous ads stating that Petraeus supports leaving troops in Iraq for ten more years.

Criticism

The Washington Post's Fact Checker stated that the General's report of "sharply declining Iraqi casualty rates is certainly open to analysis, debate, and challenge" but that "MoveOn.org does not provide adequate factual support for its larger assertion that Petraeus is 'constantly at war with the facts' and is 'cooking the books' for the White House".

Payment Controversy

The New York Times incorrectly charged MoveOn.org $65,000 for the ad using its "standby rate." The Washington Post has stated that the full one-time rate is $142,000 for an ad receiving guaranteed placement on a specific day. American newspapers generally offer discounted ad rates for repeat advertisers, for open ad placement, and if a paper can hold an ad if space is not available. Times public editor and Pulitzer Prize-winner Clark Hoyt later stated in an editorial that the organization was mistakenly charged a rate to which it was not entitled under the newspaper's policies. Moveon.org repayed the difference to the Times on September 25, 2007. The New York Post quoted a Times public relations director saying the full one-time rate was $182,000, an additional $40,000 over and above what has been paid back.

Fox News has stated:

Catherine Mathis, vice president of corporate communication at the Times,

said she could not discuss specific advertisers, but said the rate for a special

advocacy, full-page, black and white, standby ad is $64,575. At that rate, an

advertiser can request that an ad run on a specific date, but cannot be

guaranteed such placement.

Conservative political columnist George Will has argued that "the paper made a huge and patently illegal contribution to MoveOn.org's issue advocacy ad." He also stated that "The Times' performance in this matter confirms an axiom: There can be unseemly exposure of mind as well as of body."

Response

Political Response

Independent Democrat Senator Joe Lieberman, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow, and several Republican Presidential candidates criticized the ad. President George W. Bush called the ad "disgusting.". Democratic Senator John Kerry also criticized the ad. Several other Democratic Senators and Representatives distanced themselves from the ad. However, as of September 15, none of the Democratic Presidential candidates have criticized the ad. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that 23% of Americans approve of the ad while 58% disapprove.

Former President Bill Clinton has criticized what he called the "disingenuous" "feigned outrage" of the Republicans on CNN's The Situation Room. Moveon.org stands by their ad, stating that the General "offered a twisted version of the truth designed to support prolonging the war" and that "the public needs to know that Petraeus is neither objective nor trustworthy when it comes to assessing progress in Iraq". The organization also stated that the ad had been targeted by a "concerted right-wing smear campaign".

The Economist stated on September 27 that "the group had raised $500,000 the day the Senate voted, its biggest one-day fundraising total all year. Over four days, in the midst of the row, it took in $1.6m[illion]." MoveOn.org is running more ads using a 'betrayal' theme, with TV spots targeting President Bush and Rudy Giuliani specifically.

Legislative Response

On September 20, the Senate passed an amendment by Republican John Cornyn of Texas designed to "strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus". All 49 Republican Senators and 22 Democratic Senators voted in support. Democratic Presidental candidates Hillary Clinton and Chris Dodd voted against the amendment while Barack Obama and Joesph Biden did not vote.

Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer of California drafted a similar amendment on the same day. The text condemned the Petreaus ad as well as a 2002 ad attacking then-Senator Max Cleland of Georgia during the 2002 midterm elections and the Swift Vets and POWs for Truth ads attacking John Kerry during the 2004 Presidential election. The vote was 50-47 in favor, but since 60 votes were required to pass it, the amendment did not carry. The House passed an amendment to a continuing budget resolution which condemned the ad "in the strongest terms" by a 341-79 vote on September 26.

The Washington Post stated on September 20 that "Democrats blamed the group [Moveon.org] for giving moderate Republicans a ready excuse for staying with Bush and for giving Bush and his supporters a way to divert attention away from the war". Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn.org Political Action, has stated that "It is unconscionable and outrageous that instead of doing the people's work and ending this war, Congress chooses meaningless and distracting gestures.

Counter-Ads

Conservative nonprofit lobbying organization Freedom's Watch created two video ads in response. On Spetember 24, Freedom's Watch ran a full-page ad in The New York Times attacking Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad-- calling him a "terrorist". A September 28 Associated Press article stated that "Freedom's Watch and MoveOn.org could be the left and right bookends not only on the war, but on a number of issues that will decide the 2008 elections and shape congressional debate beyond." Eli Pariser has stated that "Freedom's Watch is a few mega millionaires."

See Also

• Report to Congress on the Situation in Iraq
• Moveon.org
• David H. Petraeus

External Links

• Moveon.org
• Freedom's Watch
• Critical view of Freedom's Watch by SourceWatch