Dear Matt Drudge: You Suck
Posted by Lorelei Kelly
So now we know that Prince Harry has been deployed to Afghanistan for ten weeks. The British press kept it quiet. It was American blogger Matt Drudge who blabbered. So much for loyalty and supporting the troops. Prince Harry was trained up and ready to go. Now he won't be able to apply his skills, have the experience, and help out where we all really need it.
Hey Matt, we need more troops in Afghanistan, remember? Every single one of them. We're begging NATO for more. We need EVERY SINGLE ONE of them. I know people will disagree with me about the press seeming to "cozy" with the government to keep information under wraps. blah blah blah. In my opinion, this is different. We elect leaders to make these calls, that's the risk you take when you choose who to vote for. This was a good decision and we blew it.


Look, I hate Matt Drudge too but he doesn't have any obligation to the British armed services, or to any armed forces for that matter.
What do you mean by "The British Press was kept quiet?" A democratic government isn't supposed to "keep" the supposedly independent press. Good on Drudge if only for showing the British government that they can't control information.
Posted by: Mike M. | February 29, 2008 at 12:26 PM
And are you really not concerned that the nature of the agreement, where the media kept quiet in exchange for regular photos and "upates" that they could print later as Harry's war story would have turned into pure pro-war propaganda?
Posted by: Mike M. | February 29, 2008 at 12:30 PM
I assumed the point of having a member of the royal family serve in the Afghan war was to improve the image of the family rather than the war.
I don't see the value to the public in knowing where the prince is deployed. I certainly don't care to know myself, any more than I care who Paris Hilton is screwing. Drudge is just celebrity-hounding.
Posted by: David Tomlin | February 29, 2008 at 01:42 PM
I believe that Mr. Drudge, (I use the term, 'Mr." loosely) should be punished in some way. In my opinion, the media is given too much freedom with war news. This includes the American Press, especially the American Press,i.e, Washington Post, New York Times, etc.,the most liberal of them all.If I were one of the troops, I would not want my unit's name or location given. They are in enough trouble being where they are to start with.
Posted by: Jo Ann | February 29, 2008 at 03:16 PM
Actually, I believe the Australian magazine New Idea published the report first, then German paper Berliner Kurier, THEN the Drudge Report.
Or so says ABCnews: http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=4362519&page=1
Posted by: Simmons | February 29, 2008 at 03:47 PM
Jo Ann,
Congratulations, that was the most insane comment I've read all day.
Posted by: Mike M. | February 29, 2008 at 03:58 PM
Lorelei... how does your criticism square with the fact that all Drudge did was link to previously reported material anyway?
Posted by: Mike M. | February 29, 2008 at 06:46 PM
Mike,
If the above reports are true about the Berlin paper and the Australian magazine, then I would say that, as an American, Drudge is the one I am entitled to be ashamed of. I think we need to have a conversation as a nation--in an increasingly transparent world-- about government control and the media. I err on the side of more transparency, more open society, less control (esp. with the elected leaders we have in office) and I realize that this is one of those times that prove that this belief and my own personal policy has a down side. So I shame him on a blog. Not a big deal. I do think that having the discussion is important. thx. LK
Posted by: Lorelei Kelly | February 29, 2008 at 07:11 PM
Thanks, Lorelei!
What I'd hope you'd consider is that the British government was basically colluding with the media to create a propaganda story. Drudge maybe gummed up those works a bit. It's hard to prove but I think we're better off for it. For all his flaws the existence of something like Drudge proves that government control, whether voluntary or not, can't work anymore.
Posted by: Mike M. | March 01, 2008 at 12:19 PM
The root of the problem is the British, like Americans, pretending that war can be free and painless. So Harry is serving in Afghanistan. Of course he is, he's an officer in the British Army. To pull him out because war is dangerous, that's what's ridiculous.
Posted by: David desJardins | March 15, 2008 at 07:25 PM
The consignment will be quickly delivered at your doorsteps by FedEx. All you have to do is fill in the buy tramadolmedical enquiry questionnaire.
Posted by: buy tramadol | August 23, 2008 at 10:48 AM