Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Embedded reporter comes away from front lines torn
Boston Globe | 4/22/2003 | Scott Bernard Nelson

Posted on 04/23/2003 10:10:37 AM PDT by LavaDog

BAGHDAD - A funny thing happened on the way home from Iraq this week: I found myself scoffing at the rear-echelon soldiers for how little they knew about war. About the real war, the one I had experienced, with enemy AK-47 rounds buzzing over your head and the smell of burning flesh and metal filling your nose. About enduring four weeks on the front lines, sleeping in open foxholes you'd dug to avoid shrapnel in the night. About looking terrible, smelling worse, and seeing people die.

Where were the headquarters Johnnies then, I smugly asked myself this week as I walked the former headquarters of the Iraqi secret police, now home to the US Marines' First Division. Probably drinking coffee, eating hot meals, sleeping on cots in canvas tents, and moving arrows around on wall maps.

My line of reasoning was patently ridiculous, of course. The men and women who wear the uniforms are professional soldiers; I'm a professional reporter. And not a particularly brave one, at that. Before the war, I wrote about bank presidents and insurance contracts and mutual funds for The Boston Globe's business section.

Look up Stockholm syndrome in the dictionary, though, and you'll get a pretty good idea about what I was going through in those first hours away from combat. I had lived so closely for so long under such extreme circumstances with the Second Battalion, 11th Marines, fighting their way through Iraq, that I began to think and feel like a Marine.

Therein lies the quandary for the hundreds of ''embedded'' reporters and photographers who covered Gulf War II and the editors who paid them to go. Did we sell our souls as journalists for access to the death and destruction at the front lines?

As part of a first-ever war correspondents' partnership between the Department of Defense and media organizations, we reporters signed contracts limiting what we would say and when we would say it. In return, for the duration of the conflict the Pentagon let us eat, sleep, travel - and sometimes die - with the military forces we covered. (More than a dozen journalists died in combat.)

Over time, it was inevitable that we would begin to view at least some things from the grunt's perspective.

When the battalion I'd been living with drove into an ambush April 6 north of Iraq's capital, I did more than just empathize with the soldiers. I helped them in the battle.

Like the other troops behind us in a convoy of Humvees, seven-ton trucks, and armored reconnaissance vehicles that day, I saw muzzle flashes coming from a window as we passed a squat building about 60 yards away. Several bullets skipped off the road in front of us, but nobody else in my vehicle saw where they were coming from.

I yelled to the first sergeant in the gun turret above my head, telling him which building and which window the gunfire came from. He wasn't sure to where I was referring, so I yelled again, leaning out of the window to point out the location to our right. That's all he needed. He fired nearly 100 rounds out of his .50-caliber heavy machine gun into the building as we rumbled by. The muzzle flashes ended.

We later learned that the gunman inside that building was among four members of Saddam Hussein's fedayeen militia who died in that failed ambush. No Marines were hurt.

The ambush provides the most dramatic, although hardly the only, example of how I came to identify with the Marines over time. Other embedded journalists, including my Globe colleague Brian MacQuarrie and Jules Critten den of the Boston Herald, told similar stories of their time on the front lines. Whether I acted out of self-preservation that day or because of an affinity with the soldiers I was covering hardly matters. The question is whether the coverage I provided during the war was tainted as a result.

I'd like to believe it wasn't. I'd like to believe mine was one of many diverse voices The Boston Globe used to tell the story of this war, and that good editors back home kept everything balanced and in perspective. I'd like to believe that, if nothing else, all of the embedded reporters added something worthwhile to the big-picture stories other journalists were writing from newsrooms, the Pentagon, and the armed forces central command in Qatar.

In the end, it will be for someone else to decide. Big thinkers in both the media and the military will at some point begin to analyze whether the embedding program worked, from their various perspectives.

Like the soldiers who fought on the front lines of this war, I just want to go home at this point to spend time with my family and think about something else for a while. We'll have to leave it to those rear-echelon guys to figure out how and when future wars will be fought - and covered.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bostonglobe; ccrm; embeddedreport; embeddedreporter; globe; iraq; iraqifreedom; marines; michaeldobbs; remf; scottbernardnelson; scottnelson; thebostonglobe; usmc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-112 next last
To: Mrs. P
"Did a dozen reporters actually die in combat?"

I caught that too. As far as I know, three or four reporters actually died in combat, one died of an embolism, one stepped on a land mine at an abandoned Fedayeen military facility, two were murdered by a homocide bomber (one was a reporter, the other a cameraman), and two (? or was it one??) died in the crossfire at the Palestine Hotel during a heavy firefight between US and Fedayeen forces. That doesn't come out to a dozen, but there may be some I missed. The media tends to forget the public might be concerned with dead coalition soldiers as well as media people.

The deaths are no less tragic for the fact that they weren't all from combat. Looks like combat hasn't entirely cured Nelson of leftist hyperbole. He should have left that out, but maybe this is his way of proving to his bosses that living and facing death with evil US soldiers didn't taint his 'objectivity' after all.

61 posted on 04/23/2003 11:19:34 AM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions=Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Incorrigible
At least he went further than the pansy in this thread:

Pansy huh? I take it your wartime experiences are more heroic?
62 posted on 04/23/2003 11:21:42 AM PDT by Stone Mountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged.
63 posted on 04/23/2003 11:21:44 AM PDT by harrym
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
The Liberals will be blaming these battlefield conversions on the Stockholm Syndrome.
64 posted on 04/23/2003 11:24:58 AM PDT by Search4Truth (When a man lies, he murders part of the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged.
65 posted on 04/23/2003 11:27:47 AM PDT by harrym
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. P
"Did a dozen reporters actually die in combat? I don't remember reading that anywhere before. It will be interesting to hear how they are memorialized compared to the military. Gee, I'm so cynical."


Are they counting Bagdad Bob?
66 posted on 04/23/2003 11:32:14 AM PDT by Ramzi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sloth; *all; Lev
I was interviewed by Michael Prager of the Boston Globe, in early March for an artical that appeared on March 26, 2003. Mr Prager came to us and asked for an activist, Lev emailed me, and me being me said O.K.

In this artical there is no mention of FRee Republic or that they came to us for the interview, I have better things to do with my time if they can't State where they got the resorces. I talked to a lot of the Enlisted people at the Globe and they are with us, drop the rag a Line.

67 posted on 04/23/2003 11:39:06 AM PDT by Little Bill (No Rats, A.N.S.W.E.R (WWP) is a commie front!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
Over time, it was inevitable that we would begin to view at least some things from the grunt's perspective.

Like, this is a BAD thing?? "Stockholm syndrom"?? How 'bout REALITY?? Why isn't he PROUD of ponting out the point of origin of the ambush instead of apparently questioning what he did (or did I miss something - am I just being overly sensitive about a media type??)?

Seems to me he is trying to defend his actual grasp of the reality of what he was reporting with the liberal, touchy-feely BS of his know-nothing liberal media scum peers (much worse than "rear-echelon" types!).

VERY interesting post - thanks!!

68 posted on 04/23/2003 11:50:05 AM PDT by mil-vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Celtjew Libertarian
"There were a number of journalists of other nationalities, mainly European or Aussie, who were killed. "

And I think most of the ones killed were not embedded reporters.. they were just there on their own.
69 posted on 04/23/2003 11:50:11 AM PDT by honeygrl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. P
Did a dozen reporters actually die in combat?

Not embedded. But there were lots of reporters running around by themselves, not associated with any military units.

70 posted on 04/23/2003 11:52:00 AM PDT by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Lance Romance
Quite a title. However, the story seems to tell of a liberal reporter who suddenly realizes how noble the military really is.

And decided that he hates himself for having understood it - even if but briefly.

71 posted on 04/23/2003 11:58:58 AM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
We'll all await with bated breath to read a journalist's navel gazing story about whether they are getting "too close" and perhaps biased in favor of liberal activist groups.
72 posted on 04/23/2003 11:59:30 AM PDT by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
"Did we sell our souls as journalists for access to the death and destruction at the front lines?"

Funny, they're not as introspective when cozying up to Hollywood and liberal politicians.

73 posted on 04/23/2003 11:59:56 AM PDT by rabidralph (Happy East-Over!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. P
Did a dozen reporters actually die in combat?

That depends on how you define combat. There were a few ambushes, the two that died in the hotel, and some few I haven't heard details on. I'm not aware that any embedded reporters were killed in combat oe while part of a unit as the author implies.

74 posted on 04/23/2003 12:01:36 PM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky
This young man is learning what the word "objectivity" means. He has likely been taught that it means avoiding direct experiences and emotions, so as to keep them from coloring your reporting.

What he's found out, though, is that not having experiences keeps you from getting the first hand knowledge necessary to truly report what happened. The challenge of being objective is to have those experiences, but then to use your reason and judgement to recognize where your emotions are coloring your observations, and edit your report accordingly.

This is very difficult. It takes maturity and self-knowledge, something that takes more than 4 years in journalism school to attain. A good editor helps, especially if he or she is one who's smelled the smoke themselves.
75 posted on 04/23/2003 12:02:34 PM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith
Funny that no reporters have ever been worried that by being embedded in liberal news organizations that they would identify with them and that their reporting would be tainted.

So very true. Excellent point.

76 posted on 04/23/2003 12:06:55 PM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: myprecious
The moderator should then have revised the question:

"O.K., Dan, now let's suppose that you were walking in the middle of the group of soldiers when you looked up and saw the snipers before anyone else did. Now what do you do?"
77 posted on 04/23/2003 12:07:10 PM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: LavaDog
The question is whether the coverage I provided during the war was tainted as a result.

There is nothing wrong for a embedded reporter to question his objectivity. Where I have a problem with it is thinking that his employer is objective.

I hope that this reporter also saw the good that the US military did, and can appreciate the cost of the freedoms afforded those that were freed, and the continued freedoms we have.
78 posted on 04/23/2003 12:17:38 PM PDT by Maigrey (Member of the Dose's Jesus Freaks, Purple Aes Sedai , Jack Straw Fan Club, and Gonzo News Service)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lee Heggy
That is so true. It goes to show that you can never get the real feel until you get down in the dirt and experience it for your self. My uncle went to boot camp 4 years before I did. He told me all about the yellow footprints, the DI's screaming in your face and the instant culture shock you endure when you step aboard MCRD. I thought I would be good, my uncle gave me a heads up, I know what to expect. I was dead wrong! You have to live it before you can know it! That is what happened with the embedded reporters. It was one of the best ideas to come out of the Pentagon in a long time. Semper Fi
79 posted on 04/23/2003 12:24:44 PM PDT by sean327
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Lance Romance
The term you're looking for is "cognitive dissonance".

There have been a number of articles like this in the past week or so. One of the most interesting was from an Anglo writer working for an Arab news service who was with the US Marines. She left her unit just before they pushed in into Iraq because she felt conflicted about her job. She had become so attached to the Marines that she couldn't bear to watch them go into combat argainst Arabs. She wrote "it would be like watching my brother fight my cousin".

She was in for an even greater surprise when she ran into a Marine from that unit later on. She was aboard a hospital ship when a wounded Marine recognized her. He was overjoyed to see her. The unit thought that she had been killed along with several photographers she'd been embedded with.

Much of the piece revolves around how surprised she was at how the Marines treated her and looked after her. Though she doesn't say so explicitly, you can tell that she was expecting something more in line with Iraqi propaganda.

80 posted on 04/23/2003 12:39:41 PM PDT by Redcloak (All work and no FReep makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no FReep make s Jack a dul boy. Allwork an)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-112 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson