The recent news on Newsweek’s troubles are a sign yet again of the importance of responsible reporting by the media. The first time I considered this concept was over the embedded reported who videotaped a soldier killing an enemy combatant sprawled on the ground. That debate is over and done with, and yet the conflict resurfaces with every report like this.

Instapundit, Austin Bay, and Michelle Malkin are proving themselves worthy foci of this current debacle. The damage has been done; and cognitive dissonance is the primary response to Newsweek’s backtracking. We know all to well that “we take it back” is not a worthy action for the media, and retractions—from both mainstream reporters and bloggers (when applicable—are no longer enough to stave off the consequences.

The Islamic world’s bloodlust towards this irresponsible reporting claimed fifteen lives, none of which could be granted any nobility or higher purpose. More will die, and we who do not cheer for the collapse of this nation in the face of the challenges of Islamic terrorism will be slandered by people like Arthur Silber with hyterical accusations that we are demanding censorship.

Of course, those disingenuous claims—personally offensive as they are—do not negate the need for an accountable, responsible media. It is never the goal to silence these outlets, merely make them aware of the consequences of their actions.

Free speech is best fostered through responsible speech. The unwritten contract between journalists and their readers is that the stories journalists write are truthful, and in the true sense of the concept of truth, not the code word that we have gotten too used to these days.