Stonewalled By Sharyl Attkisson Analysis

Stonewalled, a novel written by Sharyl Attkisson, a former investigative corresponder for CBS News, truly embodies what it means to question your authority. Stonewalled means to engage in obstructive parliamentary debate or delaying tactics; to be unoooperative, obstructive, or evasive. During all of the novel there are many instances of Attkisson standing up to her authorities and encouraging the reader to think for themselves. She speaks mostly about her reports on the Benghazi attacks and the HealthCare.gov mess.
Attkisson’s prologue begins with the title “Big Brother”. In the prologue, she explains the mysterious pheromone she has been experiencing with her computers and phone lines. Both of her computers mysteriously turn on by themselves in the middle of the night, including her CBS issued Toshiba laptop. She claims that her home phone, which is seldom used by family members, will ring and once picked up, the line will go silent. Attkisson’s well-informed acquaintance, Jeff, informs her that her computers are most definitely being tapped by what she calls a “three letter agency”. She calls Verizon, her cable and phone company, and asks them if they could eventually send someone to her home to come help with the problem. To her

surprise, Verizon insists on sending an employee out the next day, which happens to be New Years Day. When the “technician” comes to Attkissons home, they confirm that the wire doesn’t belong there and attempt to bring the cord with them. She refuses, and leaves it on her windowsill for some time. She forgets about it and when she does finally remember, it’s too late, the wire is gone. Attkisson attempts to get in contact with the technician that had once been so helpful, however, he never responds again.
Chapter one is titled “Media Mojo Lost” in an attempt to convey the deep rooted inaccuracies that the media has begun to portray. Attkisson begins the chapter by sharing the story where she first realized that the government is not a reliable source. She then proceeds to share multiple other stories that prove that the government has been the opposite of an ally in her quest to report honestly and fairly. She explains that many of the governments claims were completely dishonest; she says, “Until the 1990s, tobacco companies claimed cigarettes didn’t cause cancer”(pg 18). Attkisson speaks about how many corporations and the government are in cahoots of sorts, that they often times protect each other from getting into any trouble. An example of this is the BP Oil Spill of 2010 where the government refused to have the oil spill be released to the public.
Attkisson describes herself as politically agnostic, which means she’s completely unbiased to any and all political parties. She explains that instead of listening to a single sides ideas, she prefers to do her own research and think for herself. Attkisson says that it’s a journalists job to keep their own personal biases out of their research, but it’s hard to be seen as unbiased by the public. She explains that there’s no winning, no matter what view she’s seen as taking, no matter how pure and unbiased her reports are intended. NBC investigative correspondent Lisa Meyers, who departed NBC not long after Attkisson left CBS, said in an interview with C-Span, “I think journalism at its best is a matter of holding powerful people and institutions accountable and exposing injustice…I fear today that we are not doing that enough”(qtd pg. 29). This quote truly expresses everything Attkisson believes in.
In the second chapter, entitled “Fast and Furious Redux”, Attkisson opens with a claim that the U.S.

government’s federal bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is involved in supplying Mexican cartels with dangerous weapons. This in part led to the death of Mexican police officials once the weapons, AK-47 types, were in the hands of criminals. She introduces the idea of tax payers money being used to protect government officials, that the money is going to people who act as political PR directors. She comments about how this news story is one of the most important stories in CBS News history, according not only to CBS News CEO Jeff Fager, but many others as well. It ends up being nominated for an Emmy in

2012.
The third chapter, Green Energy Going To Bed The Silent Burn of Your Tax Dollars, talks about Obama’s job initiative, where he attempted to create jobs by launching Think Global with $17 million in tax credits to construct electric vehicles. The company was bankrupt less than three years later. The whole chapter claims that the green energy money that the Obama Administration is basically giving away, quite irresponsibly, has been funding failing companies. Her writing, of course, comes back to the lack of solid, independent news stories on television. When somebody asks Evening News Executive Producer Shevlin why Attkissons story isn’t airing, he replies with “What’s the matter, don’t you support green energy?”(pg 156).
The fourth chapter, Benghazi The Unanswered Questions,

When I first decided to read Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation and Harassment in Obama’s Washington, I assumed that Sharyl Attkisson would be biased and unfair. I assumed incorrectly. After reading Attkissons novel, I completely changed my view point on her as well as some of my views on the Obama administration. I’ve always been hesitant to believe exactly what the government tells us; it’s too easy for them to get away with what they want, and why should they be honest with us? Judging from past experiences where the government hid things from the public that were later revealed, I had made up my mind that their best interest wasn’t in the public, rather, themselves. While reading most of the novel I surprisingly found myself agreeing with a lot of what Attkisson had to say about the lack of accountability the government had been upheld to. I find that her points are very well researched, each individual story she decides to tell being more than a few pages long, scrawled with irrefutable facts about her many ignored stories. I did find, however, that many of her instances were a bit whiny and unnecessary to prove her point. I didn’t think it was crucial for her to ramble about the makings of a story about the governments lying about fruit disease to prove a point that they can’t always be trusted. I suppose it helps prove her point; it helps make her a reliable source. I find it hard, though, to choke down all the chalky logos she provides for her reader. It’s impossible not to yawn sometimes as she babbles on about the number of times Obama misused the word terror in his speech or the millions of tax dollars going to waste.
As for the debate of her bias, I wholeheartedly believe that she is politically unbiased. I do, however, think that she is biased towards herself. Many of her stories are biased in her own vision and only have her view of each individual situation.