JUANA SUMMERS, HOST:
If you are a journalist, you want to be the first to break a major news story, to get the scoop. And Saturday's early morning raid on Venezuela by U.S. troops to seize President Nicolas Maduro, that obviously counts as pretty big news. The Trump White House and the Pentagon have routinely attacked the mainstream media as irresponsible. Yet, as U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told ABC News yesterday, the press showed restraint on this.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
MARCO RUBIO: Frankly, a number of media outlets had gotten leaks that this was coming and held it for that very reason, and we thank them for doing that, or lives could have been lost.
SUMMERS: NPR's David Folkenflik joins us now to explain some key elements of the reporting on the story. Hi there.
DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: Hey, Juana.
SUMMERS: Hey. So Secretary Rubio on ABC News mentioned leaks. Tell us what he was referring to.
FOLKENFLIK: Well, look, all administrations, all Defense Department hate leaks. They work to counteract it and they investigate it, what have you. Under Secretary Pete Hegseth, the DOD is exceptionally leak-averse, to the point where, you know, he put up policies that would essentially strip credentials from reporters who didn't agree to not go asking for unauthorized information to be let out. In this case, these do not appear to have been briefings from the Pentagon or leaks that were officially sanctioned. Reporters were not warned, as sometimes happens, to stay close to their desk, close to home - something might happen. In this case, it appears that reporters were working their sources inside the U.S. military and other institutions and leaning on colleagues and sources, in fact, inside Venezuela as to what was happening. As Semafor first reported, The New York Times and Washington Post knew about this either as or before it was happening, CBS News as well.
SUMMERS: So why, then, the delay in reporting?
FOLKENFLIK: Well, they certainly ended up having to publish some hours later than perhaps they could have. Let's acknowledge information isn't fully clear, and that's, you know, sometimes stories aren't fully baked. Obviously, people in Caracas knew there was a firefight and some sort of attack as it occurred. Coverage there is typically tightly controlled. There is risk for reporting there, very few visas given to Western reporters. So you see Western and American outlets having to rely often on anonymous stringers there. Let's give an example. Some years ago, CBS's Matt Gutman, then with ABC, was held for five days by Venezuelan secret service for his reporting there. It's an indication of how tightly things are control (ph).
We got a statement from an Associated Press news executive named Paul Byrne. He said, one of our reporters hearing the strikes firsthand - meaning in Caracas - helped us break the story in real time. Byrne said that having people there in Venezuela lets them get the testimony and voices of those most affected out. But let's also acknowledge a tradition. As Rubio suggested, mainstream news organizations don't want to jeopardize the lives of American armed forces and...
SUMMERS: Yep.
FOLKENFLIK: ...Personnel in the midst of military operations, and you see holding back as a result.
SUMMERS: That's right. And as I mentioned, as you've reported, this administration has typically attacked the mainstream media. What has its stance been here so far?
FOLKENFLIK: Well, you've seen President Trump taking a victory lap in interviews with The New York Times, The Atlantic and others. You've seen Rubio and others going on Sunday morning talk shows. But there has been assailing criticism it has received in the mainstream media over unanswered questions like, what are the motivations? Who's going to lead Venezuela? Will there be American forces there? Hegseth and others hate those questions, but they're important ones.
SUMMERS: In the last 30 seconds we have left, given all of this, just sum it up for us. What do you make of the way that the press has handled the news of Maduro's capture?
FOLKENFLIK: Well, they're seeking, since reporting on this, to compensate for the failure of transparency by the administration, the lack of notification at Capitol Hill. You heard questions from places like Columbia Journalism Review. Should news organizations withhold such information...
SUMMERS: Right.
FOLKENFLIK: ...Even in the question of risk of lives? But covering unfolding events, as I suggested, can be messy. And in this case, major mainstream news outlets sought to show that they could be responsible and authoritative as events...
SUMMERS: Right.
FOLKENFLIK: ...Unfolded.
SUMMERS: NPR's David Folkenflik, thank you.
FOLKENFLIK: You bet. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
