Let me begin by saying I know how overwhelming the events at Fort Hood have been for all those who serve. The idea that someone, whatever his reasons, would shoot fellow soldiers hits the military like “a punch in the gut,” as so many soldiers have said to me. I understand that times like these are incredibly stressful for those tasked to get information out as quickly as possible. That said, I feel compelled as a journalist to explain to you, dear reader, why you have been hearing so many conflicting stats and details about the incident;  the Army’s effort to get details out on this event has been abysmal.

There is, as Maj. Gen Kevin Bergner, an Army spokesman, said Friday the inevitable “fog and friction” in the initial hours after an incident like this ,  and mistakes happen.  But the Army has gotten nearly every major detail about this incident wrong in the hours – and sometimes days – after Thursday’s shooting. Here are just the ones I have noticed:
1. Hasan’s survival: It took the Army five hours to correct an earlier announcement that the shooter was dead, even as the military said it had an investigator with him the whole time shortly after the shooting. Indeed, Lt. Gen. Robert Cone, the base commander, said his injuries were not life threatening.
2. Hasan’s name: Originally reported as Malik Nidal Hasan, the military did not correct it until hours later, Nidal Malik Hasan. The following morning, Fort Hood put out this press release that had his name mangled yet again.
3. Hasan’s deployment: The Army gave various reports about where Hasan was scheduled to be deployed, finally settling on Afghanistan. As late as yesterday, however, some in the Army were still saying he was headed to Iraq.
4.  The number of wounded: That figure has jumped from 31 in the morning after the incident to 42 today.
5. The ages of the wounded: Today, the military put out a list of the wounded. Unfortunately, a basic background check shows that most of the ages are wrong.
6. The investigation: It is not clear what kind of investigation the Army is conducting, who is in charge of it and when officials expect to get the results.

Moreover, it is hard to know where to go for information. Ask Walter Reed Army Medical Center and they direct you to the Pentagon; ask the Pentagon and they say ask Fort Hood; ask Fort Hood and they say call the Army. At that point, the Army will say it does not know.

That is all to say, as you read the coverage, you will likely notice that facts change days later. And I don’t think the reporters who cover this know how to fix it other than to make adjustments in story. But it all means it will take longer for the public to get any clarity on what exactly happened.