The Cincinnati Beacon
Grandma in Iraq—A Retrospective
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
Last year, The Cincinnati Enquirer sponsored a blog authored by Suzanne Fournier entitled “Grandma in Iraq.” The blog made no real impact until someone noticed that Suzanne Fournier’s military affiliations were not disclosed. So we had a military PR person writing fluff stories about the war, but a casual reader of the blog might not have understood the writing came from such a biased source. After The Enquirer got blasted for their failure to disclose that information, Executive Editor Tom Callinan debuted his own blog. Critics thought he did so as a distraction to the Grandma debacle. A few short weeks later, both blogs were taken offline permanently. Now, we are pleased to present an insight into the communications that took place behind the scenes between Suzanne Fournier and The Enquirer.
Some History
For those who don’t remember the impact of the story, here is a brief media round-up documenting the controversy that ensued when The Enquirer got called to task for their pro-war propaganda.
*Gannett owned USA Today pimped out the blog as recommended reading on February 23, 2006—click here.
*On April 3, 2006, TPM Muckraker broke the story about Fournier’s “hidden” military affiliations—click here.
*On April 4, 2006, we posted a media round-up gathering several new links, which you can still access—click here.
*On April 5, 2006, Editor and Publisher (the Wall Street Journal of the newspaper business) ran a criticism of The Enquirer’s behavior—click here.
*On April 6, 2006, Tom Callinan responded to a letter I sent about the situation—click here.
*On April 12, 2006, CityBeat ran a Porkopolis column about the growing controversy—click here.
Behind the Scenes
So what was going on behind the scenes? What is the real story behind “Grandma in Iraq”? The following documents were acquired via public records requests, and they show a strange story about the history of Fournier’s blog—which some of you may find significant. Below, you can find a link to PDF files of certain emails, and some annotations helping you navigate the story:
=====
http://research.batcave.net/grandma/GII-1.pdf
August 15, 2005 4:18 pm
William Croyle makes clear The Enquirer agreed to the blog without even seeing her writing or being told what, exactly, Fournier would cover.
August 15, 2005 7:27 pm
Suzanne Fournier claims that “personal friends” at Department of the Army in the Pentagon are “championing her request.” She says she will not misrepresent who she is or why she is in Iraq.
=====
http://research.batcave.net/grandma/GII-20.pdf
(scroll to the bottom)
August 30, 2005 4:37 pm
A unclassified communication takes place between Fournier and an unknown party. The entire document has been censored.
=====
http://research.batcave.net/grandma/GII-5.pdf
September 16, 2005 9:23 pm
William Croyle says he will promote the blog in the paper as much as he is allowed.
=====
http://research.batcave.net/grandma/GII-9.pdf
December 19, 2005 4:21pm
William Croyle begins an email exchange about how The Enquirer would like to run a Christmas Eve piece on Fournier. Questions are generally soft, avoiding any criticism of the war—with the small exception of question #14: “There has been a lot of negativity here lately about the war. Tell us about the war from your perspective?”
In the answer, Fournier has nothing to say but glowing propaganda about how wonderful everything seems.
=====
http://research.batcave.net/grandma/GII-11.pdf
February 27, 2006 4:24 pm
William Croyle decides to do another story on Fournier, and asks her to compare what she’s seeing to the negative things presented in American media—providing another outlet for her PR work.
=====
http://research.batcave.net/grandma/GII-12.pdf
March 2, 2006 1:29 pm
Fournier answers Croyle’s questions. Says the US work is morally right and historically significant. Croyle responds saying he will put the story in Saturday’s paper.
=====
http://research.batcave.net/grandma/GII-13.pdf
April 4, 2006 7:58 pm
Chris Graves emails Fournier, asking for a biography for her blog. He responds by telling her that some bloggers have taken issue with the blog for not disclosing her role in the war effort, and claims that he has updated the blog with her affiliation clearly posted. Graves also asks about the terms of the blog, so he can understand it more.
April 4, 2006 2:01 pm (Time difference must relate to time zones.)
Fournier responds saying it was an idea that happened after talking with Bill Croyle. Fournier says Croyle asked Gannett, and she asked the Department of the Army. She does not mention having friends in the Pentagon “championing the cause,” though emails cited above document that fact.
Fournier says that there have been a few blog posts and articles in the paper mentioning her affiliation, and claims that therefore it is no secret. She claims she can handle blog comments on the matter.
By April 5, Fournier is responding negatively to her critics, saying they do not believe in freedom of speech.
=====
http://research.batcave.net/grandma/GII-16.pdf
April 5, 2006 11:54 pm
In an email to Chris Graves, Fournier quotes an article in the paper by William Croyle where her affiliations were mentioned, and she seems to think that means the blog disclosed everything appropriate. She says no one is to blame and her critics do not believe in free speech.
=====
http://research.batcave.net/grandma/GII-19.pdf
April 6, 2006 9:29 pm
Chris Graves sends Fournier a question from a blog commenter, asking if the military checks Fournier’s blog posts before they go public.
Fournier responds saying that no one checks them, and claims that whoever would ask such a question has “problems.”
(RE: http://research.batcave.net/grandma/GII-20.pdf
In an August 31, 2005 email from an unknown source, Fournier is told she “aware of the specific restrictions, limitations, and other considerations.")
April 8, 2006 8:32 am
Fournier writes to William Croyle, copying the message to someone whose identity has been censored. Fournier is shaken by the negativity surrounding her blog, and defensive. She indicates that the blog will be ending soon, and that it should be taken offline shortly after her final post.
=====
http://research.batcave.net/grandma/GII-20.pdf
April 26, 2006 4:19 pm
Fournier sends an unclassified email about the blog. The recipient and the contents of the message are censored.
The Future
Why this retrospective? Why now? Gannett has been moving people around at The Enquirer, and Tom Callinan’s new position seems suspect.
Popular opinion against the war has reached a new critical mass, which may give new perspectives on The Enquirer’s behavior from last year.
Additionally, these documents raise some questions about this one-time Enquirer blog. Why have certain unclassified documents been totally censored? What is there to hide about the old “Grandma in Iraq” blog?
|