Posted on 04/27/2006 11:55:04 AM PDT by Cannoneer No. 4
One of the big issues at the MiBlogger Conference was, of course, bias in the media. While there are those who will contest such claims, it seems pretty clear to Murdoc that (at the very least) the mainstream media suffers from gross ignorance of military strategy, tactics, and history. This, of course, is gross generalization, and there are exceptions to the rule. But the low number of exceptions do a lot to prove said rule.
To this unhappiness with Col. Hunt's moderation, Murdoc submits the following:
A) It's Col. David Hunt, for freaking cripes. He wasn't chosen because he handles things with kid gloves. If you were surprised at his behavior, you obviously aren't terribly familiar with the guy. He's a prick. It's his job and he's damn good at it. That's why we all like him. Should Andi have called the Welcome Wagon lady or something?
Hunt was challenging the panel. And the rest of us. Murdoc doesn't know exactly where Hunt stands on the MilBlogging issue, but it's clear that things are growing faster than authority's capability to control them and he's worried that good intentions might cause more harm than good with the general public. He wants to keep everyone's feet on the ground by asking tough questions.
B) No one likes to be told that they aren't the kings of the world. Especially after a long day of getting patted on the back. Trebly so when it's a gruff old bastard like Hunt saying it. But we would all do well to at least consider his words. The risk for real damage to the American cause (and the safety of our troops) is always going to be there, and we have to be on constant guard against it.
One point of debate that came out of that panel was the role of and use for embedded reporters. Though this generally mean professional journalists dispatched by members of Legacy Media, it can also mean lunatics guys like Bill Roggio who pay their way into the combat zone in an effort to uncover the truth. For the purposes of this post, Murdoc means the former variety: The professional journalist sent into the combat zone as an embedded reporter by what we lovingly call "Big" or "Legacy" Media.
We're all aware that during the early weeks of the campaign in Iraq the American public was solidly behind the invasion, at least according to opinion polls. Much of this has been attributed to the presence of quite a few embedded reporters among the troops. The reports sent back by the likes of Greg Kelly were invaluable to the general populace to glimpse what was going on and to witness our guys in action.
Since the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime, however, the number of embedded reporters has dwindled to virtually nothing. Sometimes we'll see reporters from smaller newspapers covering local troops deployed to Iraq, but the overwhelming majority of reports come from reporters tucked away in the hotels of the Green Zone in Baghdad. They get their news from DoD releases (which are generally ignored) and from their army of stringers. The stringers, of course, know what sort of news gets coverage, and no doubt do their best to get it.
As poll results favoring the invasion and reconstruction of Iraq have slumped, we're left to wonder how much of the support evaporated when the news from embedded reporters on the evening news, cable stations, and major newspapers vanished.
This idea of "tainting" is curious to Murdoc. What, exactly, is this "taint" of which we speak? It seems that simply recognizing that US troops aren't baby-killing machines brainwashed into performing their mission passes as "taint" these days. It seems that those who wake up to the fact that many US troops actually believe in their mission and are often appreciated and treated warmly by Iraqi citizens need to be watched out for and quarantined immediately.
Murdoc doesn't think that MilBlogs are ever going to replace Legacy Media or DoD press releases. Though a valuable fact-checking service will be provided, and little glimpses into things otherwise unseen will be available, the majority of Americans are not going to be getting their news from MilBlogs any time soon. And if they were, you can bet that anti-war MilBlog-ish sites would be popping up like weeds to counteract the perception of "good news" offered by a substantial number of MilBlogs.
Murdoc says "no". At least not "exclusively". Even most of the sites that aspire to more than general diary-like personal reporting do not have the means and resources to get across what needs to be communicated. Not in a way that's understandable by John Q Public. "An Army of Davids" MilBloggers might be, but no one is going to be able to keep up with enough of the Davids to really be able to understand what they need to understand about Iraq and the military. And don't kid yourself that, even if some of the MilBlogs get "big" enough to actually do this, they won't be facing some of the same issues (pressure from advertisers and other sources of funding, for instance) currently faced by Legacy Media. Are MilBloggers valuable? Yes. Very. But they're not a full-on replacement for traditional journalism.
Embedded reporters can fill a critical role, not only as front-line eyes and ears covering events for the evening news but also as a sort of bridge between John Q and the alien worlds of the military and of war. As much as we'd like to think that MilBloggers can do this, it simply isn't going to happen on the scale that we need it to happen. Not soon enough, at any rate. What MilBloggers can do is fill in the spaces and gaps. They can take what's reported and elaborate in a way that traditional media simply cannot. This function and the critical overwatch mission, noticing and pointing out things that Legacy Media missed, ignored, or just plain got wrong, is where the Army of Davids can shine. If the media simply insists on getting it wrong, bloggers can swarm. But that won't work consistently on a daily basis. It will quickly degenerate into free-for-all tabloid journalism.
What needs to happen is that somehow (a magic wand, perhaps?) Legacy Media needs to get the fact that embedded reporters serve a valuable function. No matter how valuable the function, they probably won't willingly send off their employees to become "tainted", so pressure needs to be applied. But how can we apply that pressure?
If only the ratings of new programs and the circulation of newspapers and news magazines would decline.
With a very few exceptions, bloggers can't just drop what they're doing and go embed with Marines in Iraq. Most of us have day jobs. And spouses that would forbid it anyway. But Legacy Media has the resources to do so. They simply choose not to. You can bet that if our troops were usually murdering Iraqi civilians, razing Iraqi villages, and abusing Iraqi prisoners that there would be no shortage of embedded reporters. They would be falling all over themselves to cover the story firsthand. Legacy Media can. They simply choose not to.
We would be well-served by a few more embeds covering events in Iraq (and Afghanistan, for that matter). Maybe Legacy Media would stop the bleeding in their circulation departments. The low number of embedded reporters is a failure by Legacy Media to serve completeness to its consumers, and maybe various forms of pressure will convince major players in the media to send more embeds if its going to cover the war. Maybe the American public would get picture of the war that's more in line with that of those fighting it. Maybe American reporters rooting a bit for American troops wouldn't be considered "tainted".
Those are all big 'maybes'. But they're 'maybes' worth keeping in mind as the blogosphere in general and MilBlogging in particular evolves. Kepe the facts and insights coming. Keep the pressure on. Keep being the reason for Big Media to mimic the small media.
ping
The best phrase, "the mainstream media suffers from gross ignorance..." sums up journalism.
Journalism majors and MSM "professionals" seems completely devoid of any knowledge of history, logic, military history or tactics. Listening to them opine on anything is grating because their ignorance is almost unbounded. Three year olds know more about Mayan architecture than journalists do about anything.
The blogosphere can beat the MSM at fact checking and rapid debunking of bogus info. No matter how arcane the subject, there is a blogger somewhere who is a subject matter expert.
Absolutely true. That's a big part of the reason that MSM is going to either enter a period of extinction or adapt to telling the truth and sticking to verifiable facts for survival.
>>No matter how arcane the subject, there is a blogger somewhere who is a subject matter expert.
And probably within 10 or 15 posts here at FreeRepublic, if it's an important issue of the day.
All better now.
I suggest taking "legacy" media types out on patrols tied to the hood of a Humvee so they can become properly "tainted".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
