Editorial: Koran affair explodes in resentment

Newsweek magazine's backdown yesterday over the small story that sparked enormous consequences seemed to be the mother of all media mea culpas. As well as its readers, it had to apologise to the victims of the riots provoked by its report that interrogators at Guantanamo Bay had flushed a Koran down the toilet to put pressure on Islamic prisoners.

Not so, said the Pentagon and when the magazine went back to its original source the story had changed. He had seen it somewhere, apparently, but possibly not as the finding of the inquiry.

The magazine admitted the error but it was a hedged apology. It did not rule out the possibility that the incident had taken place and produced two other instances in which similar claims were made. Moreover, it declared that more allegations, credible or not, are sure to come.

To some, Newsweek's actions will appear to be the latest in a line of commendable and credibility-enhancing confessions by media organisations which have made serious mistakes. Others might see the episode as just another example of an irresponsible press publishing insupportable material, this time with tragic consequences on the other side of the world - at least 15 people dead and more than 100 injured.

Judging by the magazine's own inquiry into how this happened, the critics have a point. Not only did its reporters use a source whose recollection was faulty but when they sought corroboration they found someone who corrected them on one innocuous point but was not in a position to know whether the Koran allegation was true or false. It appears that they took his silence as verification.

Nor does the magazine do itself any credit for attempting to blame Imran Khan - the Pakistani politician better known to New Zealanders as a champion cricketer - for sparking the riots by brandishing last week's copy at a press conference while berating the Pakistan President for his alliance with the Americans. In this age of globalisation news travels as fast as a satellite signal and it is hardly surprising that an Islamic politician would seize on news of such a shocking piece of sacrilege to attack his opponent.

Of course no spark will cause an explosion unless the conditions are right. In this case the atmosphere was volatile for two good reasons. First was the nature of the allegation itself. There have been many previous stories about abhorrent abuses at Guantanamo Bay, but this time it was worse, not just because some politicians wanted to exploit it for their own purposes but because in Muslim eyes nothing is as bad as the desecration of their holy book.

Second, it is clear that despite the liberation rhetoric trumpeted by Washington, resentment towards the United States remains deep throughout the Islamic world, even in Afghanistan where it thought it was making progress in winning hearts and minds.

For the media, as always, the lesson is to get the details right, especially when sensitivities are so acute and when news travels so fast. In this case it is arguable that the story would not have had the same impact if it had been reported as an allegation rather than a fact established by a formal inquiry.

But there are also lessons for the Bush Administration, which has been at pains to portray itself as a paragon of democracy at the same time as it tries to avoid tarnishing the War on Terror with the impression that it is just a disguised clash of civilisations.

In setting up Guantanamo Bay prison, where the Islamic inmates are denied their legal rights and everything is shrouded in secrecy, it does precisely the opposite.