[antimedia] antimedia: You want to know why the news from Iraq sucks?....

[Email subscription to blog articles]

Posted by antimedia:
You want to know why the news from Iraq sucks?....
http://www.antimedia.us/posts/1147922796.shtml


   ....Listen to someone [1]who's been there. There's way too much good
   stuff in this article for me to do it justice, so go read the whole
   thing.
   Here's a sample.

     I have concluded, based both on my experience, and the reports of
     other newsmen, that an unconscionable amount of what we in the
     press have been feeding the American public regarding the war in
     Iraq is fashioned by the propaganda arms of our enemies. Baâathist
     kidnappers and Jihadi bombers are planning their operations not to
     win the war in Iraq, but to win it in America. To that end, they
     are assessing what American reporters are willing to cover, and
     what American news organizations are willing to risk.
     This has been made abundantly clear in Al Qaida documents recently
     released by Centcom and the Coalition. An excerpt of the translated
     document reads:
     The policy followed by the brothers in Baghdad is a media oriented
     policy without a clear comprehensive plan to capture an area or an
     enemy center. In other words, the significance of the strategy of
     their work is to show in the media that the American and the
     government does not control the situation and there is resistance
     against them.
     Stated simply: Al Qaida is not even trying to win the war on the
     ground anymore. It is attempting to win the war in the press.
     And theyâre doing pretty well. On April 2, 2005, when Al Qaeda in
     Iraq attempted to assault Abu Ghraib prison, I was the only
     reporter there. The unit I was with was patrolling the area as part
     of a week-long op, and caught the tail end of the assault. The
     Marines didnât think much of it. The main result was a bunch of
     dead insurgents. The next day, when the sun came up, we saw the
     v-beds that didnât even make it off the highway and the remnants of
     so-called lions of taweed.
     It wasnât until we were back in base, watching TV in the chow hall,
     that we discovered that the failed assault was âBIG NEWSâ and
     reporters were showing up after the fact. Two-to-three days after
     the fact.
     As a Marine Colonel told me. Al Qaeda lost that fire-fight in Iraq,
     but they won on CNN.

   I can't put it any better than that. As JD points out, Bruce Kesler
   wrote about this earlier in Editor & Publisher.

     But you wouldnât know it from the war coverage on network and cable
     news. On network news you have 4 story templates:
     The two most common are the Balcony shot of a reporter recapping
     the latest car bombing, and the computerized map showing the latest
     bombing. Less often, you get an interview with some Iraqis, nearly
     always in Baghdad invariably saying how bad things are. And in the
     rarest of these templates, a real live U.S. newsman reports with a
     coalition unit, usually long after a major event, as in âTal Afar
     six months later,â âMosul six month later,â and the one I saw most,
     âFallujah Six months later.â And of course, âAbu Ghriad, two days
     after a major attack.â
     Why only 4 templates?
     Bruce Kesler, writing in Editor & Publisher asked, âIs the Media
     Covering Iraq On the Cheap?â
     Yes, they are. In the article Kesler talks about the cost of
     insurance policies for reporters in a combat zone, the cost of
     security, and though he doesnât mention it, there is probably a
     hazard pay bump.
     Which all leads to Kesler writing,

     âIronically, the same media that criticizes the U.S. for sending
     too few troops to stabilize Iraq send too few reporters to cover
     much more than the dramatic bombings around Baghdad.â

     During the height of the Michael Jackson trial last summer there
     were 2,200 credentialed reporters hanging around the courthouse.
     During the initial invasion of Iraq, there were 452 reporters
     embedded with the coalition. Last Summer I saw only a handful of
     reporters drift through Fallujah. In fact, I saw more talk radio
     show hosts than reporters.
     Why? Think back to the opening scenario I gave you. Al Qaida and
     its fellow travelers have used violence, kidnappings and the ever
     present threat of violence against reporters to lock down news
     coverage. Covering a war is dangerous enough, then, when one side
     deliberately targets reportersâthe stakes are raised.

   Not only has the media fallen in to Al Qaeda's trap, they refuse to
   even admit it or address the problem.

References

   1. http://www.facesfromthefront.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=162&Itemid=3