Different Stories on Fort Monmouth

How did Wednesday’s Congressional hearing on the decision to close Fort Monmouth go? It depends on which news reports you read because they vary widely.

The Star-Ledger and Associated Press both reported that there is little chance the fort will remain open:

AP: Pentagon officials aren't budging on plans to close Fort Monmouth despite criticism from New Jersey's congressional delegation. Testimony before a House subcommittee Wednesday is unlikely to change the Base Realignment and Closure Commission's recommendation.

Star-Ledger: Supporters of Fort Monmouth went before a congressional committee yesterday to restate their arguments and vent their frustration about plans to close the New Jersey Army base and move its communications research operations to Maryland by 2011. But New Jersey lawmakers and community advocates got a clear message from the Pentagon and from the House Armed Services Committee: The 2005 decision by the Base Realignment and Closure Commission to close Fort Mon mouth was ratified by Congress, is now law and will not be changed.

The Asbury Park Press, however, painted a much more optimistic picture:

New Jersey congressmen are expressing guarded optimism following a House Armed Services subcommittee hearing yesterday that probed the skyrocketing costs of the Pentagon's 2005 military base shake-up. The lawmakers called for continued inquiries. There is some reason to believe the subcommittee on readiness hearing would not be the last session in an investigation of the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure process that recommended the closure of Fort Monmouth and the transfer of much of its mission to Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland.

Why the difference? Read my study, Media Coverage of Domestic U.S. Military Bases and How It Supports the Military Industrial Complex, to see examples of how the Asbury Park Press coverage of the Fort Monmouth issue is flawed.