How the media changed

UPI ^ | April 8, 2003 | Martin Walker

[Indy Pendance]

BASRA, Iraq, April 8 (UPI) -- Something fundamental has happened to the British and U.S. media during this war. Those who have spent time on the front lines with the coalition troops, whether embedded with individual units or traveling independently through liberated Iraq, have learned to love the military.

Time after time, they saved our necks. They put our soft-skinned vehicles behind their armor when the shells came in. They told us when to duck and when it was safe to move. They shared their food and water with us, and were embarrassingly grateful when we let them use our satellite phones to call home. We were embarrassed that it was all we could for them.

We saw how hard they tried to avoid civilian casualties, and the risks they took by their self-restraint. We began to understand their quiet pride in their skills, and the plain decency of the men and women who follow the profession of arms.

When we got lost, U.S. Marines went out of their way to put us right, and British officers sketched "safe" areas on a map. They are kind to one another, and considerate to civilians like us.

"Thank God for the British army," said a grinning UPI photographer Chris Corder (an American) as we tucked in behind the comforting bulk of a Warrior armored infantry vehicle of the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards one night outside Basra, and were offered a cup of tea.

Above all, they are no longer "the military." They have become individuals that we have got to know, like little Robert, who to his regret is too short to stand guard outside Buckingham Palace, and has to remain behind doing stores duty.

There is Paul from Northern Ireland who is genuinely upset at the poverty of the Iraqi people he sees and fills his pockets with biscuits and candy to give to the children. There is Sarge, who grumbles that this war is all about oil and is far from sure he likes it. There is Chris, a volunteer from Zimbabwe, whose dream is to play his bagpipes for the Queen, and who hesitantly asks if we can find out if Manchester Union won its match.

With the British troops and the U.S. 3rd Division, with the 101st Airborne and the Marines, with the gunners and the medics and the Air Force and aboard ships, there are hundreds of journalists learning the same lessons, getting to know the same kinds of troops, and realizing that we in the media had better rethink the way we do our work.

One of the consequences of the way the British and Americans have dropped conscription and now use professional armies is that the media and the broader population have become disconnected from their troops.

The military have become a private club, and one that has learned to distrust most of the media, who know little of the people who fight in their country's name. The legacy of wars in dubious causes like Vietnam or some of the British colonial wars has widened the gulf of mutual ignorance and mistrust.

This still happens. At one of the daily briefings at Coalition Command headquarters in Qatar (about 300 miles behind the lines), a large and skeptical media corps became restive at what they saw as military stonewalling or weasel words about responsibility for civilian casualties in the Baghdad bombing.

Journalists on the front lines took a very different view of the need for operational security. We did not even complain when we were ordered to turn off our satellite phones because the Iraqi guns seemed to be able to zero on their transmissions, or when we were asked not to report something.

"Screw the nut on it, mate," a British SAS Special Forces trooper told me when I came across him questioning one of his Iraqi agents inside Basra. "No photos, and not a word until Basra falls -- all right?"

Of course it was alright. Forget journalistic objectivity. There were armed men across the road trying to kill me, and my protection depended on these British troops, many of whom I knew by their first names. There was no question which side I was on.

In the same way, those of us in the field knew that those gloomy armchair pundit accounts from London and Washington of setbacks and "pauses" were missing the point.

We learned to understand the painstaking way the British were gathering intelligence in Basra and steadily separating the Saddam loyalists from the bulk of the population -- so the place finally fell like a house of cards.

Air Marshal Brian Burridge, the British commander, suggests that the hundreds of journalists who have learned a new understanding of the military could change the way the media covers war. It is about time.

[big gray tabby]

Thanks. I sent it around to my pinko friends who are apoplectic at the prospect of reporters actually sympathizing with the troops.

[wise counsel]

Wow!! BIG bump! I love these embedded reporters who bring us the real picture!!1

[Don W]

Good catch!

[Question_Assumptions]

I wasn't the one being picky about the spelling and grammar. My favorite, though, which I also missed, was using "vice" for "vise" in recent headlines.

[lawgirl]

Those who have spent time on the front lines with the coalition troops, whether embedded with individual units or traveling independently through liberated Iraq, have learned to love the military.

Bump one up for Rummy. Let me just say it again- the Bush administration is genius. GENIUS I TELL YOU!

[LiberationIT]

There goes his career.

[Atlas Sneezed]

"alright ... remains in common use especially in journalistic and business publications."

Thank you for the correction. I will try to forget the memory of a school teacher several decades ago pointing to The Who's "The Kids are Alright" poster as containing an egregious error. ("After all, there's no such word as 'alwrong'" she said.)

I still hold the opinion that journalists should be the ones that resist a linguistic shoulching into slang and informal usages, instead providing a beacon of "correctness."

[aimhigh]

Can we say clique? I thought so............

I love proof readers. Thanks.

[fqued]

Amusingly, enough, back in the stone age when I was in grade school, there were THREE acceptable ways of spelling it:
alright
allright (one word)
all right (two words).

times change, but I surely wasn't taken aback by his spelling, but was rather pleased.

[ohioWfan]

Absolutely, lawgirl........a brilliant move by Rummy......brilliant!

You can't continue to swallow the leftist lies about the military when you are confronted every day, moment by moment with the truth.

[CyberAnt]

"we in the media had better rethink the way we do our work"

WHAT! A media who actually "thinks" about what they're reporting - what a novel idea!

[CyberAnt]

"driving the dems crazy"

You bet it is - and they are really worried what this "new breed" of journalists will do to them when the media returns from the war. I'm hoping it will have opened their eyes to see the total bias of the organizations they work for - and how they can now begin to change that bias. This is not good news for the dems; especially as they head into an election year.

Rush talked about it alot, and he said that at first he was not for it, but after a few days of TV reports, he began to notice a difference in the tone of the reports. Many of the reporters were now saying "we" or "us". Rush said he was shocked to realize the media had bonded with the soldiers. Many reports said the hardened media was being disolved to tears at the care the military gave to each other, as well as civilians, and the common theme - freeing the Iraqi people.

Rush predicted that when these guys get home, they will see America in a whole new light - as well as seeing the world in a whole new light.

[CyberAnt]

Actually, it wasn't Rummy who came up with the idea - IT WAS A LADY - there was a story about her recently on FR. Very interesting! She designed the whole program and presented it to Rummy. Everybody told her it would never fly - Rummy liked it and sold it to the President.

It is brilliant. I believe it has spawned a whole new generation of media - a media who will branch off and start a new organization - which will be direct competition for FOX - but competition is good. The old guard - CNN NBC CBS ABC MSNBC will have to change their stripes or be bulldozed out of the way.

[PISANO]

Those arrogant members of the press that attend the briefings at Qatar, the Pentagon and the White House should learn a lesson by this........BUT THEY WON'T. They will remain anti-military and anti-Bush and anti-American!!

[sultan88]

Good article!!

[cherry_bomb88]

There are these that have learned, then there are those in CentCom asking for war crimes to be charged because we fired on the hotel some reporters where staying in when they were TOLD to get the F**K out of Baghdad and they were basically on their own if they didn't...and now, it's the militaries fault....this should be a rotating assignment...send Helen Thomas to the embedded...no wait...our troops would be surrendering!

[Indy Pendance]

Thanks, maybe all is not lost yet!

[Indy Pendance]

Apparently, there were terrorist snipers positioned within this hotel. The truth will be told eventually, as with every other 'crime' the US has committed.

[cherry_bomb88]

I agree...these stinking reporters just make me want to scream some times...I'm sorry our troops who are risking their lives daily didn't think about those who were told to get the heck out of dodge or stay at their own risk...but...ya' know...tough poopie

*wishful thinking~bunkerbuster goes astray and takes out Palastine Hotel...oops...I said it outloud again, didn't I????

[Terabitten]

There's another interesting side effect of the embedded media that won't show up for months or years after the war is over. Once those reporters come back home, and go back to work in their (liberal) offices, how long do you think they'll remain silent if a fellow reporter bashes the military, particularly if that fellow reporter hadn't been an imbedded reporter as well?

This has the potential of completely changing the face of mass media coverage in America.