Military Says Rolling Stone Broke Ground Rules on McChrystal Story
EmailABC News' Luis Martinez reports:
A senior military official tells ABC News that Rolling Stone broke journalistic ground rules established for the magazine’s profile of the general by publishing comments that occurred during what McChrystal’s aides thought were off-the-record sessions that would not be reported.
The official said the magazine’s claim that there were no ground rules for the interview and profile was an “absurd statement.”
Reached for comment tonight, Mark Neschis, a spokesman for Rolling Stone magazine, denied the allegation that the magazine had claimed there were no ground rules and said they were followed "to the letter."
The official said a review of events has found no ground rules for the article in writing, but the official is confident that many of the attention-grabbing comments made by McChrystal staffers were made in what they thought were off-the-record discussions.
The official said the review of events found Rolling Stone reporter Michael Hastings conducted “several one-on-one interviews — some of those were on background and others were on the record.” Hastings was also allowed access to other sessions that “were off-the-record and intended to give him a sense” of how McChrystal’s team worked together.
The official said no evidence has been found to suggest that the most “salacious political quotes were from any of these one-on-one interviews. They all appear to have been in settings that were off the record.”
In an interview conducted this afternoon by the Washington Post, Rolling Stone magazine's executive editor, Eric Bates, said no ground rules were broken.
"A lot of things were said off the record that we didn't use," Bates said. "We abided by all the ground rules in every instance. In every case in this story there were multiple times in which there were express requests for off-the-record and background or not-for-attribution, and we abided in every instance."
The miltary official said Rolling Stone is incorrect in stating that the magazine sent McChrystal’s staff an advance draft of the story, claiming the magazine instead sent a list of 30 questions compiled by a researcher who was fact-checking Hastings’ article. Those questions, said the official, did not “come close to revealing what ended up in the final article.”
However, magazine spokesman Neschis denied the official's statement.
"We never claimed that we gave McChrystal"s staff an advance copy of the story," Neschis said, adding that an e-mail sent by a magazine researcher fact-checking information for inclusion in the article "is just a portion of the fact-checking process."
He added, "As part of the fact-checking process, we never fact-check quotes that are given to us directly from the source."
Magazine executive editor Bates told the Washington Post the magazine was under no obligation to check the quotes.
"If we have [remarks] on tape or said … in our presence, and we have detailed notes, it's not like we're hearing from someone else and checking, 'Hey, is this right?'" he said.
When public figures say things that are unwise, "we don't go back to the sources and say, 'Hey, did you really say that?' " he said.
A copy of the e-mail sent by the magazine researcher to McChrystal's staff and obtained by ABC News shows the submitted questions requested confirmation of details to be included in the article.
Among the items being checked was whether McChrystal’s staff had a “full-scale operations center" set up in the Hotel Westminster during their visit to Paris this past April. “Yes” came the reply from McChrystal press aide Duncan Boothby, who had set up the interview and resigned his post in the wake of the controversy surrounding the article. He added. “Not sure, I’d call it full scale, but everywhere we go we have capability for immediate comms.”
A key moment in the Rolling Stone article was when Hastings described how McChrystal and President Obama failed to connect on a personal level from the outset. Hastings went on to describe a description provided by aides of McChrystal’s first meeting with Obama where he “didn’t seem very engaged.”
Hastings description of McChrystal’s relationship with Obama began with the mention that McChrystal had voted for Obama. According to the researcher’s questions, that information came from McChrystal himself. In his reply, Boothby requested that piece of information not be included in the article because it would present an undue command influence.
The researcher asked, “Did Gen. McChrystal vote for President Obama? [The reporter tells me that this info originates from McChrystal himself.]”
Boothby replied: “Important – Please do not include this. This is personal and private information and unrealtd (sic) to his job. It would be inappropriate to share. My reason for this is it would present an undue command inflluence (sic) on junior officers or soldiers who should make their own political decisions. There are very strict rules in the military on separating church and state on this sort of stuff – Have to keep out of political preference and personal choice.”
- Luis Martinez
* This blog entry has been revised from its original version.
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Gee, wouldn’t it have been nice if any of this had been investigated beforehand? I’m totally disgusted with this reporter and the administration for acting like spoiled school children. I don’t agree with McChrystal on many things, but a brilliant career was torpedoed by a glory hound reporter and a diva president.
And yet, we still hear the press scream if they don’t have access wherever they want to go.
Geraldo sits there and draws out maps on the ground where troops are, against regulations. Hastings gets his career bumping story at the cost of lives and careers. Military people ought to just decline to be around reporters or keep their mouths shut if one is forced on them.
Posted by: JMW | June 25, 2010, 7:41 pm 7:41 pm
So is anyone really surprised that RS set out to do a hit piece and duped McChrystal and his aides? Come on man…its a left wing rag, what the hell else did you expect?
Posted by: Bruce R | June 25, 2010, 7:43 pm 7:43 pm
Well, let’s see. The Beltway lapdog press generally says “off the record until you say on” but they teach you in journalism school it’s “on the record until I agree to go off the record.” See the difference?
Posted by: Susie Madrak | June 25, 2010, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm
If McChrystal trusted leftist reporters then he had it coming. Who else would have this silly man have trusted, Obama?
Posted by: CLN | June 25, 2010, 8:13 pm 8:13 pm
Seriously, if Rolling Stone magazine is over there, with unfettered access to top brass.. why not have a Better Homes and Garden story on how to decorate your tent? Popular mechanics on IEDs? An “O” magazine spread on depression while deployed? How ’bout Emeril on combat cooking?….talk about “BAM!!” I mean, what the heck is going on over there?
Posted by: cindy | June 25, 2010, 8:42 pm 8:42 pm
Two people have lost their jobs over this. Is everyone at RS still employed? They should be ashamed of themselves, having ruined respected careers. From the start, I was surprised at the supposed candor of McChrystal. Someone of his rank knows better. I find it questionable that he and more than one staffer made such candid comments. It is highly unlikely all of them would be that foolish. RS lost what little credibility they had. The have done a disservice to all reporters who might attempt to interview members of the military in the future. Front line access? Doubt it. After this, all branches should refer media requests to the WH since they know so much about military operations.
Posted by: Lagunatrimom | June 25, 2010, 8:48 pm 8:48 pm
Mcchrystal did not operate like anything but a primadonna. His and his staff’s arrogance is apparent in allowing this reporter such access. They seem to truly believe they could do no wrong. I say good riddance Stan m.
Posted by: LTR | June 25, 2010, 9:09 pm 9:09 pm
He said what he said, he thought what he thought, and – more importantly – even before this article he had estranged many of America’s allies. Some of you who love authority figures so much, with no real knowledge of the man, seem to have serious daddy issues.
Posted by: Mark | June 25, 2010, 9:16 pm 9:16 pm
RS is simply a rag that I will not read…not that I ever have, but you haveto be somewhat of a slimeball to be a good reporter anyway…kinda like a lawyer.
The only mistake was letting scum like that RS reporter in the same presence as our heroes in uniform.
Posted by: chris | June 25, 2010, 9:28 pm 9:28 pm
Seems like the only thing McChrystal is guilty of is voting for Obama and being a soldier. The fact that Obama fired him over this article shows he cares more about his image than he does about results. Obama couldn’t figure out that the comments were made third hand off the record? He could if he wanted to. Dope and change.
Posted by: Ivan | June 25, 2010, 9:30 pm 9:30 pm
They set out to do a hit piece and they accomplished it. For some reason they never saw the need to uncover the ‘real’ Obama when they wrote about him.
Posted by: Ferrari5555 | June 25, 2010, 9:35 pm 9:35 pm
There seems to be some conservative backlash against rolling stone. I don’t agree. First and foremost McCrystal defiled one of the nine principals of war; unity of command. There is no grey area here. Fortunately for the soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen RS was in a position to expose this. Good for them. If you can’t uphold principals published in DoD Joint Doctrine as a General Officer then you are clearly not the man for the job. McCrystal knows this and disregarded anyway. What other principals of war did McCrystal disregard? How many of our brave men and women have died because of his incompetence? Give the men and women of our armed forces some leadership that can do at minimum, what they were put there to do. Follow orders!
Posted by: Eric P | June 25, 2010, 9:42 pm 9:42 pm
It’s a conspiracy, I tell ya. (yawn)
Posted by: Aaron | June 25, 2010, 9:49 pm 9:49 pm
I’m stunned at the people commenting here asking if we are surprised at RS doing a hit piece. You know what I was surprised about? A 4 star general giving ANY reporter this kind of access, much less one from the RS. I feel bad that a seemingly good man has lost his career but at the end of the day, he brought this upon himself. My personal feeling is his ego was trying to be the “cool guy” being interviewed by the RS.
Posted by: Cheryl | June 25, 2010, 9:57 pm 9:57 pm
General McCrystal is a national treasure, who tried to win the war w/o resolving to destruction and mass killing. A leader who fought with his troops, a great character who dares to question his inexperienced boss than to blindly submit, if this not a great American spirit, I don’t know what else. God would never put a good man down.
Posted by: Digital88 | June 25, 2010, 10:10 pm 10:10 pm
Both the Iraq and Afghan wars are unconstitutional because Congress never declared war. A truly patriotic officer would have resigned his commission in protest against these wars by presidential dictators. That’s the real fault with McChrystal, Petraeus, and the others.
Posted by: John Seiler | June 25, 2010, 10:15 pm 10:15 pm
the official is confident that many of the attention-grabbing comments made by McChrystal staffers were made in what they thought were off-the-record discussions.
———–
Hmmmm…. well,that explains a lot. Perhaps, Hastings was drunk out of his mind as well.
Posted by: progressive mama | June 25, 2010, 10:35 pm 10:35 pm
McChrystal is lucky he wasn/t charged with a violation of the UCMJ, making demeaning remarks about the Commander in Chief. Having these opinions, and even expressing them to, say, your wife, is not a violation, but expressing them in public, as it is considered detrimental to good order. McChrystal paid the price for this.
Posted by: GiggleT | June 25, 2010, 10:37 pm 10:37 pm
“The only mistake was letting scum like that RS reporter in the same presence as our heroes in uniform”
I know! Those darn reporters are just so naughty. But really, the General was running his mouth off to a reporter of all people. It’s like having a few highballs and then telling your mother-in-law how much you like your new girlfriend. You’ve got to wonder about the competence of other decisions he’s been entrusted to make after such a blunder.
Posted by: Skip | June 25, 2010, 10:40 pm 10:40 pm
Bruce R said “So is anyone really surprised that RS set out to do a hit piece and duped McChrystal and his aides? Come on man…its a left wing rag, what the hell else did you expect?
___________________________________
If McChrystal is that easily duped by the “lefties” then he shouldn’t be in charge of anything.
Posted by: Faurtz8 | June 25, 2010, 10:49 pm 10:49 pm
From all accounts, McCrystal has been the same outspoken man from the get go. So that begs the question why Obama hired him to begin with.
McCrystal suggests that Obama didn’t know anything about him when he first met him. So is that the explanation?
How about that McCrystal voted for Obama/Biden, is a liberal himself, and proving that refuses to allow Fox news to be watched in his presence?
See….something doesn’t add up? Why make discouraging remarks about those you support?
Posted by: Susan | June 25, 2010, 10:51 pm 10:51 pm
First of all, when your talking with a reporter there is no such thing as off the record. That is a respect that has long died off. Second I don’t disagree with anything that was said, but I definetely disagree with the apparently lack of intellengence on the aids part for setting the whole thing up. These guys should have known better and like some other said, come on Rolling Stone. What a stupid thing to do.
Posted by: DougBob | June 25, 2010, 11:21 pm 11:21 pm
The general in his heart now knows the truth about the dummy we have leading the country,the worse dum one we ever had in history knows nothing period.I just hope he would retire from the Military and run for President.The thin skinned kid we have there now is a disaster to USA.He is destroying us day by day.. Shame but true he and his crooks around him. We will be destroyed from within and he is doing a good job at it . God save us.
Posted by: Joeray | June 25, 2010, 11:34 pm 11:34 pm
You can’t be in his position and get duped by Rolling Stone. Even if they cheated.
Posted by: The Northern Star | June 26, 2010, 12:26 am 12:26 am
I hope these guys are proud of themselves. Ruining a man and his career over quotes they knew were off the record just to boost their sales. Besides that, they are ruining it for honest reporters, in that now no access or interviews will be allowed at all.
Posted by: Boscoe | June 26, 2010, 1:12 am 1:12 am
Article 88 was broken. In fact according to McChrystal’s Military record for a few decades, there are several right ups for a few Articles plus 88 being broken. So how did he ever make it to General?
According to Article 88, to break Article 88 means court-martial.
But of course Republicans pretend that Article 88 does not exist every time we have a Democrat President.
Posted by: Angie | June 26, 2010, 2:21 am 2:21 am
The General and his whole staff were Special Forces experts, but they allow a crap rag Rolling Stone writer outflank and outmaneuver them!? A quick Google search on this so called writer would have told them all they needed to know concerning this stinking creep! He is a certified military hater….And make no mistake, Rolling Stone is jumping for joy and popping corks for pulling off this coup de gra!…Breaks my heart!
Posted by: Sam | June 26, 2010, 2:26 am 2:26 am
You would have to fire 70% of the military if their off the record comments ever became public.
Posted by: Bill from Pa. | June 26, 2010, 3:04 am 3:04 am
Come on. Give the general a little credit. He and staff wanted to show discourse and leave.
Posted by: Bill from Pa. | June 26, 2010, 3:18 am 3:18 am
MCrystal voted for Obama, the reporter was only doing his job and had every right to print what he printed. The right wing schmucks now complaining were so adamnant on Clinton’s impeachment on his affair. They had no problems in humiliating that president. Right wing rags had a field day then, publishing cheap details. Suddenly its not kosher to print the generals thoughts and mutterings. Stupidity and hypocrisy from right wingers again and again.
Posted by: Mmmoke | June 26, 2010, 5:26 am 5:26 am
Rolling Stone is probably the only REAL news magazine out there. The other news outlets are mere token STENOGRAPHERS for the people in power and print whatever they are told to print. Investigative journalism had died during the GW/Cheney years, its good to see a news reporter ‘TELL IT LIKE IT IS’. I would like to see in print some of the ‘off the record’ views, so that the public is given the REAL story, instead of the filtered PR politicized and anti Obama garbage that Foxnews airs.
Posted by: Mmmoke | June 26, 2010, 6:10 am 6:10 am
the “good” general and his comrades work for the military and there is no time that they have off. They are employed 24/7 and it’s my belief there in no such thing as “off the record”.
They showed their true colors and paid for it with their jobs.
Good Riddance!!!
Posted by: dk | June 26, 2010, 7:17 am 7:17 am
General Petraeus has just landed in Alfghanistan. He called his wife, but was so afraid of complaining to his wife that while “I am away from you in this dangerous, desert dust environment, with make-shift toilets everywhere, Obama is having a round of golf in the lush green taking Michelle to expensive dinner and shooting hoops.” That is his real feeling.
Posted by: young_voter | June 26, 2010, 7:19 am 7:19 am
just read article 88 of the UCMJ. The whole lot of them should be court martialed.
Posted by: dk | June 26, 2010, 7:20 am 7:20 am
Oh welllllll………. guess this shows the stupidity of McChrystal and his aides…. trusting a leftwing magazine reporter….. Guess they deserve what they got……
Posted by: Vet1973 | June 26, 2010, 7:59 am 7:59 am
Poor wimpy BO…. finally had to pretend to be a real executive and make a decision without setting up a bipartisan commission to do a six month study on it to provide him with his decision…….
Posted by: Vet1973 | June 26, 2010, 8:00 am 8:00 am
dk: What school did you go to? Of course there is such words as off the record. Those words have been used for years. Off the record means don’t print that statement. But the Rolling Stone Magazine’s editor did’t care what he printed and the military should take Hastings to court and sue.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | June 26, 2010, 8:01 am 8:01 am
ditigal: You are so right. The fact of the matter is that the truth was told about Obama and his administration {they are the biggest joke in election history}and he rejected what was said. He fired the general to save himself from embarrassment to the public which we all know he cannot run this country.
Posted by: Mariann Pepitone | June 26, 2010, 8:05 am 8:05 am
I guess I’m from the old 60′s thinking, not considering the R.S. as the MSM.. but I guess they are.. I would think that the R.S. was just the kind of press that would ‘break the ground rules.’
Posted by: Dontget818 | June 26, 2010, 8:31 am 8:31 am
McChrystal giving that interview to a magazine like Rolling Stone is almost like Bill Clinton’s affair with an intern.A huge lapse of judgment.There is no “off record ” in either case.
Posted by: Jabli Izvesti | June 26, 2010, 8:39 am 8:39 am
Poor wimpy BO
Posted by: Vet1973
yeah…. maybe…
I hope he gets out of both places,..
Bush & Cheney just liked ‘forever wars’, they start ‘em,..but never intended to win….
they sub-contracted the war out to the ‘private sector’, with results similar to Wall Street.
Posted by: PO'd | June 26, 2010, 9:24 am 9:24 am
forgot…
re: ‘they sub-contracted the war out to the ‘private sector’
Pentagon seems to be going to that well again….
Posted by: PO'd | June 26, 2010, 9:26 am 9:26 am
This type of behavior is why we need to restore honor–8/28/2010.
Posted by: whathappened08 | June 26, 2010, 9:44 am 9:44 am
This speaks volumes about the huge pride and arrogance these high-ranking military have! It’s not mostly their fault; it’s their staff fault also who make a career out of flattering their bosses. They know it works! There’s a whole bunch of unqualified officers in the system that reached their rank because they were excellent, not at their jobs, but at flattering their superiors. You can read it in the article! They treated McChrystal as if he were a god! Of course, being the type A person that he and many others are, McChrystal was convinced he was actually invincible (a god). What an embarrassment, not only for the Army but for the country! They should all be fired as an example to all the others soft-soap that are still very much alive in the system! It’s so bad that the culture now is not to do what’s right but to be Mr. Nice-Guy or you simply don’t progress. Well, as proof that there’s value in doing the right thing, we’re now seeing the results of cutting corners.
Posted by: AGT-R | June 26, 2010, 10:12 am 10:12 am
When this whole mess hit the public fan I wondered WHO authorized this level of access to General McChrystal and his staff. I knew that he would not have permitted this without PRIOR approval from the Pentagon.
It seems that the Pentagon was aware and in control of the access all along. Why the Pentagon did not have the rules and stipulations in writing displays the continued idiocy of those in control.
Knowing how journalists through the years treat interviewees, I have no doubt that they did indeed violate the rules.
All that is left is to decide who at the Pentagon might have been complicit in setting the General up. I still believe the General was wrong to say many of the things he said, but saying them off-the-record is far less culpable than saying them with the knowledge they would be published.
Posted by: malcat | June 26, 2010, 10:53 am 10:53 am
And anyone thought the media had scrupples? This is the very heart of the matter though, did the General say this stuff or not, and if so, why would he say anything off record that would not be said on record. That’s an integrity issue not a media issue.
Posted by: smokepipe12345 | June 26, 2010, 11:32 am 11:32 am
Big joke…you run your mouth and then complain when it comes back to haunt you…How old are these guys…9 or 10
Posted by: David | June 26, 2010, 11:40 am 11:40 am
And anyone thought the media had scrupples? This is the very heart of the matter though, did the General say this stuff or not, and if so, why would he say anything off record that would not be said on record. That’s an integrity issue not a media issue.
———–
Smokepipe, do you work for someone else? If so, have you NEVER said anything negative about your boss or the company that you would NOT want made public?
I work for someone else…a very large corporation in fact, but I’m assigned to a very small account. I just spent a week of sheer H*** trying to accomplish the near-impossible in 3 days. I worked 16-20 hours a day. I’m glad no one in management was in the room with me a lot of that time. What I said would have gotten me fired AND thrown under the building.
My integrity is fine; I was just frustrated, tired, and angry.
Posted by: malcat | June 26, 2010, 12:32 pm 12:32 pm
I still believe the General was wrong to say many of the things he said, but saying them off-the-record is far less culpable than saying them with the knowledge they would be published.
Posted by: malcat | Jun 26, 2010 10:53:07 AM
I agree. We may disagree as to whether the President hit the right notes in talking about this (because I know a lot of people who comment here are dead-set against the President) but I think he did. Its sad and unfortunate, and yet McCrystal had to go once the article came out. It seems to me McCrystal was well aware of that.
I’m not one who thinks this is what McCrystal will or should be remembered for. The good has ultimately outweighed the bad for him before — its not like he has never faced or been involved in controversy before. And, personally, it all made more sense to me as soon as I heard a lot of liquor had been consumed during the unexpected trip. I don’t begrudge them that– good grief, the stress of their job alone gives them license to party and blow off steam during off hours in my mind. I just couldn’t believe they allowed access to the reporter throughout.
And maybe they didn’t– or thought they didn’t. Or just didn’t and the reporter overstepped.
This absolutely adds additional mitigating circumstances.
As for the reporter, he, too, was in an odd position–don’t you think? We’re all craving a bit more substance, a bit more unspun reality– we want a better press corps and truth, yes? I wouldn’t be one to disparage the Rolling Stone, which has published some great investigative, deeper-reaching pieces and alternative voices. Not that Rolling Stone shouldn’t look into it, and handle the matter– and the reporter– accordingly, in keeping with professional standards… but some people are just knee-jerk disparaging the publication, without knowing all the facts, or reading the magazine on a regular basis.
Posted by: progressive mama | June 26, 2010, 3:22 pm 3:22 pm
This is the right result for a General gone wrong. General McChrystal can’t be that dumb or drunk to have a reporter there for those chats? Or is he?
The Commander in Chief did the right thing in naming General David Petreus to take over the Afghanistan duties.
Posted by: Vikingslost | June 26, 2010, 10:18 pm 10:18 pm
Vikingslost,I wish you would change your name.I used to bag groceries for Bud Grant.
Posted by: Nephron | June 26, 2010, 10:38 pm 10:38 pm
He shouldnt have been talking to that den of inequity anyway. This is the General`s fault for even going there in the first place. He was looking for the lime light and got lit up instead. All liberals are dishonest. Look at how the bastions of liberalism rant and act everyday of their lives. They are like spoiled children that have no idea the rules apply to them as well. He deserves what he gets for being stupid. Call it a “Dumb Ass Tax”.
Posted by: Dave | June 27, 2010, 8:50 am 8:50 am
It may have been “off-the-record” but it tells of the distain many military personel have for the president. They look down on any man (President or whoever) who did not “serve” ….he’s not a “real” man to them….therefore not worthy of respect.
Posted by: prohb | June 27, 2010, 9:23 am 9:23 am
The Gen. should not have been open with a reporter working with Rolling Stones. Whether on the record or not, Rolling Stones has been an anti-military magazine since Vietnam. Additionally, this reporter had no reason to gain the military’s trust as he clearly didn’t want to have continued access.
Gen. Petraus was a mastermind with how he handled Iraq. I believe he will expertly handle the conflict in Afganistan.
Posted by: Baroness | June 28, 2010, 8:18 am 8:18 am
you can’t trust any reporter much less one from rolling stone. Fact is Obama was mad as he felt it was McCrystel who leaked he wanted additional 40k troops. and the fact we lost progress, and live’s ‘s while he fiddled with deciding wither to send any? sort of like black Hawk down, when the military wanted armor and clinton wouldn’t give it
Posted by: big al | June 28, 2010, 1:12 pm 1:12 pm
You completed some good points there. I did a search on the theme and found the majority of persons will have the same opinion with your blog.
Posted by: SLT-A65 | November 18, 2011, 1:43 am 1:43 am