Friday, June 25, 2010

The reporter that brought down "The Runaway General"

For those who haven't explored this Rolling Stone article in full, it's worth the read. It runs the gamut on things we tend to find intriguing: history, politics, killing, foreign culture and special operations. One important premise to this post: since we have not heard anybody publicly disputing the quotes or attributions contained in the article, we're assuming that they are indeed accurate.

Once you've read The Runaway General, come back to the fundamental question, "Who took down Stanley McChrystal: the reporter or McChrystal himself?"

The follow-up question might be, "Did Obama need to relieve him of command during such a critical time in the war in Afghanistan?"

A well-read PR professional commented to me that the article didn't seem that bad. It got me thinking, if the article wasn't really all that bad, why is McChrystal out? As I pondered that question, a number of other questions sprang to mind...
  • Is it possible that Obama doesn't want to appear as the weak-kneed president in front of the electorate, at least when it comes to his role as Commander-in-Chief?
  • Can the title of an article (e.g. "The Runaway General") influence a president's decision vis a vis the previous question?
  • Which would be more expensive politically in terms of a support base, if Obama wants a second term in office: sending McChrystal packing or alienating Biden et al in his own administration for not having their backs?
  • Does Obama need something right now to turn public and media attention away from the BP disaster (for which he's been criticized fairly heavily)?

Finally, the boss (in this case, McChrystal) is always accountable for the actions of his or her subordinates, including their seemingly insubordinate comments. If they feel that free to disrespect the President and Vice President (directly and indirectly) so openly with a member of the media, it would seem clear that McChrystal has, at best, not taken action to curtail such action or, at worst, led them in song.

Based on the last and arguably most important point, I'll concede that the title of this blog post is wrong. It wasn't the reporter that took McChrystal down...the General brought down the General.

No comments: