Television, newspapers wrong on war in Iraq

The Washington Times ^ | April 13, 2003 | James G. Lakely

[seamus]

Iraqis danced in the streets, kissed the cheeks of coalition soldiers, threw flowers in the path of tanks and cheered as U.S. Marines helped bring down a statue of deposed dictator Saddam Hussein.

It was a scenario wholly contrary to a future many of those very same media outlets predicted just days before.

[Jeff Head]

The major media outlets have been (with the exception of FOX News) completely wrong ... and in most instances they have done so intentionally IMHO to try and advance their own agenda.

In my own outrage at this occurring over and over again (and it still occurs), I created the following site to try and portray it more correctly.

[Support Free Republic]

---

PRETTY IN PINK
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[Reeses]

they all had different agendas

Don't forget the lamestream media, such as Reuters. Their agenda is to tear apart America as we know it, just like the terrorist "freedom fighters" they go along with.

[f.Christian]

When the press market collapses why don't these losers jump out the windows ?

[MHGinTN]

Not environmentally freindly, don'tcha know! Who would clean up the mess? Pigeons might pick their bones and thus spread the liberal disease that infested them.

[ez]

Newsweek IS an "arrogant blunder for the ages."

[Reeses]

History repeats, socialists drive themselves into the ground:

[NJJ]

When I went to college, all the grades were posted on the wall for all to see. Someone ought to setup different catagories and list all the media, reporters and outlets, and give them grades by some standard, then post it all.

[Nick Danger]

...they all had different agendas," Gen. McInerney said.

Regardless of what their individual agendas were, the thing that was so stunning was how cravenly all of them lied to the public in order to promote their agendas. It is as if they did not understand that there were cameras in the battlefield, and we could see for ourselves what was going on.

For all the jokes lobbed at "Baghdad Bob" for saying that "the Americans are nowhere near Baghdad" while a tank came up the road behind him, he was really no worse than the BBC telling us the same thing (no Americans in Baghdad), or Robert Fisk telling us there were no Americans at the airport... or all these "experts" telling us that the plan had failed and we would never take Baghdad.

The press has really outdone itself in terms of showing just how biased and even crooked it really is. At least three-quarters of the stuff they told us turned out to be wishful thinking by anti-war crusaders posing as journalists, who wanted it to go badly so they could crow about it. It truly was disgusting to watch.

[Amore]

"Gen. Wallace said: "The enemy we're fighting is different from the one we war-gamed against." The New York Times ran a correction a few days later in which it informed readers it left out the words "a bit" before the word "different." "

Of all the examples cited, this twisted quotation strikes me as the most deceitful and agenda driven.

[catpuppy]

Alarming facts about secret police, abductions, beatings, dismemberment and assassinations under the Iraqi dictator were not reported to the public, Mr. Jordan wrote, "because doing so would have jeopardized Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff."

Sounds an awful lot like "We had to destroy the village in order to save it." But hey, if CNN does it it must be okay.

[drjoe]

"For all the jokes lobbed at "Baghdad Bob" for saying that "the Americans are nowhere near Baghdad" while a tank came up the road behind him, he was really no worse than the BBC telling us the same thing (no Americans in Baghdad), or Robert Fisk telling us there were no Americans at the airport... or all these "experts" telling us that the plan had failed and we would never take Baghdad."

Actually it was far worse. BB was payed to lie and to keep up Irari morale. As bizarre as it was he was doing his job. On the other hand the media was payed to tell us the truth about what was going on. They failed. Utterly.

[Hatteras]

"Television, newspapers wrong on war in Iraq"

This would suggest that there was, at one time, some credibility to begin with. Can you say "What a president does on his own time, is none of our business."?

I knew you could...

[Ligeia]

Glenn Beck just read your piece on his radio program on WTNT! He loved it as you did such a great job pointing out how poorly the media performed on almost every level during this military campaign; and we can't remind them often enough.

[seamus]

The sheer number of poor predictions -- and not just from lefty loonies but from "respected" journalists like Koppel and Jennings -- is absolutely breathtaking.

The good news is that Fox News, which might have been a bit too "cheer-leady" in its coverage but was right nonetheless, just crushed CNN in the ratings. CNN was counting on the war to give them the momentum that would push them back above Fox News. Did not happen. In fact, the war allowed Fox to bury them even more. And in light of the confession by Eason Jordan that he shilled for Saddam, their credibility continues to spiral downhilll.

Couldn't happen to a better network.

[MHGinTN]

At least one 'journalist' went even further, encouraging the brutal regime to murder more of it's subjects in order to blame the coalition! And the network employing him tried to spin his remarks to keep him in Baghdad on their payroll! I wonder, could the Iraqi people bring the reporter and his supporters up on crimes against humanity? And what about the amazing protection CNN offered to the brutal regime in order to continue access to the scene?!

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

As bizarre as it was [Baghdad Bob] was doing his job. On the other hand the media was paid to tell us the truth about what was going on. They failed. Utterly.

Not so. Journalism's job is to attract and keep your attention as long as possible, for fun and profit. The way they do it is to claim to "tell us the truth about what was going on"--then scare you out of your wits so you can't ignore them.

So CNN was serving its actual--not its nominal--mission perfectly when it told us the bad news that, e.g., Saddam had unanimous approval within Iraq. And when it did not tell us the favorable news that the guy Bush was fingering richly deserved it.

[Defiant]

R.W. Apple Jr. wondered if President Bush's "luck" was "about to turn in the winds and sands of Iraq?"

Johnny Apple is a hayseed.

[Defiant]

Useful Idiots: How Liberals Got It Wrong in the Cold War and Still Blame America First
by Mona Charen

Syndicated columnist and CNN commentator Charen offers a moral indictment of those public figures-politicians, entertainers and professors-who, she says, stubbornly refused to see communism for what it was: a brutal, dictatorial death machine. Throughout the Cold War, some public figures and activists cheered the Communist movement and berated America for its capitalist ways. Famous actors traveled to Cuba to smoke a cigar with their favorite dictator; posters of Che Guevara, Castro's military leader, adorned college dorms during the '60s; the Soviet Union was praised and defended for its social progress. Charen particularly singles out the media as having played a significant role in distributing tendentious if not false accounts of world events. One example tells of Katie Couric's visit to Cuba in 1992. Upon her return, according to Charen, Couric raved about Cuba's "terrific health-care system," but uttered not a word about the men and women detained in Cuban prisons.