Misinformation at Root of Controversy Over PBS Documentary

 by Adeeba Folami

 In today’s post-9/11 world, inaccurate reporting about Muslims seems to be of little concern to some news watchers, editors and publishers. This appears to be the case with Cybercast News Service (CNS), staff writer Kevin Mooney and his article “Nation of Islam Allowed to Review PBS Documentary on Moderate Muslims,” (Aug. 2007). In it, he makes allegations against Dr. Aminah McCloud, a Professor of Islamic Studies at Chicago’s DePaul University. Last year, the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) hired her as one member of a panel of consultants assigned to review the “America At A Crossroads” documentary series prior to its airing on affiliate stations. One film in the series was called “Islam vs Islamists: Voices from the Muslim Center,” produced by Martyn Burke and Frank Gaffney.

The CNS article is based on statements – some inaccurate and false – attributed to Burke who is unsettled because his film was later rejected from the series after concerns were raised by the panel. Mooney uses Burke’s words to lay the blame for the exclusion on “radical professor” McCloud who – the article states – “gave a rough cut of the documentary to the Nation of Islam.” The professor told The Black House News (BHN) that she was never contacted for comment by CNS and denies turning a copy of the film over to the NOI. She acknowledged, however, showing a video frame from the film to a member of the American Society of Muslims (ASM) – a group which is mentioned in the documentary and was formerly headed by Imam Warith Muhammad, son of Elijah Muhammad who is also mentioned.

“There are several frames in the video where the allegation, by one man who was in [ASM], was that the Imam had taken money from the Saudi government and used it to build a masjid. That was inaccurate,” McCloud said of the Islam vs Islamists film. “The way the producers spliced footage together, it looked like you had the accusation on one hand and the splendid mosque on the other, so the viewer gets the idea this is the mosque he spent money on.” She further explained that the pictured mosque was located in California and not Chicago as portrayed and thus a negative implication could be drawn by viewers. “The producer could be sued for that so he needed to go back and check his sources,” she continued, adding that she recommended such in her written report to PBS.

She further revealed that the NOI is not even mentioned in the documentary as Mooney’s article insinuates by mentioning “Rev. Louis Farrakhan’s history of espousing racism and anti-Semitism.” Such language may have been used to secure more emotional reaction from the film’s supporters who earlier this year engaged in a campaign against PBS’ decision making.

Gaffney, the documentary’s lead producer, ignited the storm this past spring when his columns and articles began to be published on various “conservative” websites. In “The Film P.B.S. Doesn’t Want You to See,” (Townhall.com, April 2007), he described his video as one focusing on what happens to moderate, anti-Islamofascist Muslims who stand up for democracy. He never referenced McCloud by name but referred to an advisor who was an admirer of the NOI , “an organization whose receipt of a million dollars from the Saudis to open black Wahhabi mosques is a feature of our documentary,” his article stated.

McCloud found it interesting that Gaffney did not know the difference between the NOI and ASM. “[He] conflated the two so Imam [Mohamed's] community became the [NOI], which I’m sure both [groups] would be fascinated to learn,” she said, adding that she is not a member of either community. Her criticisms of the film, she said, were not aimed at seeing it excluded from the series because she thought the overall story should be told, minus the one “glitch.” She went on to describe some of the additional problems other consultants had with the documentary’s “aesthetics.” “The transition between places was not smooth and the fact that people chosen [as interview subjects] were lone rangers and didn’t seem to have a following was something all of us found problematic.”

The group of advisors, she explained, was hired to use their expertise to detect potential problems and any inaccuracies that could put the documentary’s producers at legal risk. She was surprised that, rather than work to clarify his work, Gaffney chose to mount a battle against her even though her position was that the film’s contents needed to be seen by the public.

Others were also baffled by Gaffney’s reaction. “What is most puzzling about this stand-off is the unwillingness of the producers to countenance any changes,” PBS Ombudsman Michael Getler said in June. His 5-page column, “At PBS, the Pressure is On Before the TV Goes On,” compared two documentaries, including Gaffney’s, which had raised public controversy and were challenged successfully by “groups of federal lawmakers with special interest” in the films.

In this case, Gaffney’s campaign drew high level attention because he is founder and president of The Center for Security Policy which is described as a conservative think tank. He is also, according to Getler, “a leading columnist on national security issues,” and “a former senior Pentagon official during the Reagan administration …. well known and connected in Washington.”

Gaffney’s complaints, along with the paranoia caused by the widespread distribution of his misinformation about McCloud’s actions and the involvement of the NOI, resulted in eight congressional representatives and two senators becoming involved in the matter. The pressure was enough to move the Corporation for Public Broadcasting – PBS’ federal funding source – to find another way to distribute the film which has since been showing on select PBS stations. The film’s producers and supporters see this as a small victory and although many of them consider McCloud’s alleged actions as a “breach of journalistic ethics,” it is ironic that their own “conservative” writers and editors appear to be the ones truly guilty of such breach by writing, publishing and distributing inaccurate, false and unverified information. Gaffney, being a national security expert, would easily be able to identify whether ‘misinformation’ or ‘disinformation’ is the best word for the campaign that has taken place.

McCloud is bewildered by the “interesting series of lies” that has unfolded from this situation, a web in which she is at the center through no choice of her own. Her view is that since 9/11, journalistic ethics have been buried or flushed. “There are no ethics here. They’re not checking their sources or speaking to the person sitting at the center, who is me,” she said. “I am going to find out what my rights are because the slander is affecting me.”

CNS nor Gaffney responded to email or phone queries about the origin of the misinformation or whether retractions and apologies would be as widely distributed upon confirmation of McCloud’s words.

Adeeba Folami is a freelance journalist residing in Denver, Colorado. She can be read and contacted at http://bhonline.org.

© 2007 – All Rights Reserved – The Black House News
Unlimited online distribution allowed with acknowledgement of bhonline.org as the source