Good read.
Why don't you forward this to Fox news? (Suggestion, add paragraphs)
Very well written article. I wholly concur with all you've said.
Dead heroes who happen to be Iraqi just don't matter to these elites.
No news value, no care at all for their bravery.
I sincerely regret what happened to these folks and hope they recover fully, but yes, you are correct. The media has their own sense of self importance.
Excellent post! Take two pats on the back out of petty cash.
What makes all of this more galling is that the leftists will blame Woodward and Vogt's injuries on Bush because they wouldn't have been in harm's way had he not started this "unjust" (in their demented minds) war.
good post!
"But to fixate on his injury while at the same time ignoring the stories of wonder and tragedy set forth by those striving for the liberation of Iraq, not to mention our own personal safety, is frankly, nauseating."
It is the MSM elite attitude.They see the life of our brave solders good for political manipulation purposes only.
Welcome to FR btw. Are you still here?
As much as I dislike the Junk Media, I will give Woodruff credit he WENT out there to actually see Iraq unlike so many of our Junk Journalists.
I stopped watching ABC News a long time ago (the smug Peter Jennings was just too much to take), so I don’t know how Bob Woodruff has been as an anchor.
I pray for him and for his cameraman Doug Vogt.
Now that we have a high visibility anchorman hurt by those Islamist/Baath savages I'd like to express a few thoughts about the press and the US effort in Iraq.
As mentioned, I haven't had the opportunity to watch Mr. Woodruff or to hear the manner in which he describes the US effort in Iraq. Most journalists who report on Iraq, are, of course, opposed to the effort. They refuse to use the first person plural when referring to the US or the US effort. For example, during World War II when Edward R. Murrow was reporting from London he would speak of "our" forces, "our" attacks, "our" victories and defeats, "our" cause. He would use the words "we" or "us." He saw himself as a journalist and as a US citizen, so naturally, the US effort was his effort.
Modern journalists, however, are way too sophisticated to be citizens of the United States. They are above the pettiness of loyalty to a nation. The first amendment (or so they think) makes them "citizens of the world," with loyalty to what they smugly consider a higher calling. So, the US, US forces, US leaders, US troops, and the US cause are just abstractions to them...no more worthy of linking to the words "our" or "we" or "us" than when they describe a monsoon in Bangladesh.
This mindset is, of course, disgusting and reprehensible. They use this distancing technique from the land of their birth to ostensibly show their objectivity. After all, in this technique they treat all parties as equals, don’t they? No one gets bestowed with "our" or "we" or "us." So, it must be right and objective. Why should we complain?
We should complain because these same journalists have no hesitancy in saying "our" or "we" or "us" when they report on other aspects of American life: health care, social security, racial politics, etc. So, it is totally transparent and evident that by being "objective" about the US effort in Iraq, that they really oppose it. If they can get all misty-eyed about hate crimes in the US, and speak of how "we" have a fractured society when reporting about race or Hurricane Katrina, then they ought to be able to get equally misty-eyed when a young soldier dies for "our" effort in Iraq. But, of course, they don't (they sure do get upset, however, when one of their own gets hurt—TV is currently chock-a-block with reports on Woodruff).
Mr. Woodruff's unfortunate run-in with Islamist murderers is making headlines all over the press...whereas the death of the brave young men and women that make it possible for him and ABC News to be making its reports from Baghdad gets a yawn from the press. I guess some people's lives are more worthy than others.
On the ABC site there is paragraph after paragraph about Woodruff and Vogt and not a word about the young men who accompanied these ABC personnel (evidently they were with Iraqi personnel, not US). Were any of them injured, guarding the journalists, who when they file their reports will likely denigrate their efforts? Perhaps if ABC wasn't there, sniffing around, looking for negative news about the US effort in Iraq, those Iraqi soldiers who were plucked from their regular duties in order to escort these "citizens of the world" might not have been injured.
I think ABC should have found some soldiers from the army of the "world," of which they are so proudly citizens, to accompany them, instead of Iraqi or US Army soldiers.
When Messr. Woodruff and Vogt became victims of the IED, I'll bet that they and their ABC staff were screaming for "our" medics, "our" forces, "our" helicopter evacuation, "our" surgeons. The people and resources that they called upon to save their life were not called for in "objective" "citizen of the world" language. I'll bet, that "we," "our," and "us" were uttered plenty. It's kinda sad that it takes a few pounds of TNT to make a "citizen of the world" into a US citizen.
I bet that the LSM would barely make mention if it had been someone like Britt Hume or Ollie North.
This may be cold blooded but, too bad it couldn't have been Rather and Cronkite.
I want to know who pays their medical bills. Will our military be reimbursed for working on these two tourists?