|
I can agree that this is fishy and feel that the biggest conflict of interest (aside from them already being retired from the military which makes their ability to be objective a bit difficult) is the fact that they are double dipping as consultants to contractors and the media. This certainly raises a lot of questions.
However, the point made in the quote, "— a clear ethical violation for most news organizations... " isn't conclusive. The key word being "most". I know, from doing PR for years, that there are some journalists and organizations that will pay their own way on a junket and there are those that will accept "freebie". Again, this is not technically illegal. To put this into perspective... did all of those embedded journalists pay for their flights to Iraq, their accommodations and every K ration they consumed? Probably not.
Personally, I think news outlets should never accept gifts or services in kind. But in practice it happens all the time.
To be clear, I am not defending their actions here. I think there is definitely something here that stinks but this is still a moral one rather than a legal one (though I think there might be something verging on illegal with the consultants that were also representing military contractors, I will wait for the report before I make up my mind).
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
|