Media new boogeyman of Iraq

UPI ^ | 9/27/2003 | Oamela Hess, Pentagon corresspondent

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

The frustration may come down to a difference in philosophy about the media's role in Iraq: Ought it be a dispassionate reflection of the every day reality of Iraq, which is, in my opinion, better than what news coverage suggests? Or ought it point out the problems that need fixing that the CPA and military are not aware of or acting on? Should it be a voice for the people trying to reconstruct Iraq, or the people in that country who have no voice?

The answer, of course, is both. The White House and Pentagon have bully pulpits and enormous budgets to tell their story.

Not true. The White House and the Pentagon may have pulpits, but the "bully" pulpit belongs to the TV anchor man. So yes, journalism should be a voice for the people in Iraq who have no voice--that is an apt description of the poor grunt trying to do his job and stay alive--while journalism gives Saddam's acolytes what they are killing for--positive ink as a credible threat to the US military.

That network anchorman works for a company which is in business through the good graces of the United States government--in the form of the FCC. It is in the national interest that the portion of the truth which government-licensed broadcasters tell be fairly representative of "what's going on in Iraq." "What's going on in Iraq" is not limited to bad news--and a government-licensed broadcast journalist should be required to make that clear as a condition of retaining their license.

Reporters, however, make their reputations on stories that effect change. When resources force them to pick, the latter will nearly always triumph. In my opinion, that's about the way it should be.

In my opinion, that's a good reason to read a book instead of the front page of a newspaper.

[inPhase]

Guess I was thinking that Bremer should have his own reporter team, embedded and invite whomever too. Let them debate it out, yes.

But I think they are doing that
http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/
which you prob know and the sitemap has more interesting places.

One is a pictures and all news site, articles etc. A little dry though.

[StriperSniper]

but nobody can find time to report the full story in Iraq.

Since that Georgia Dem wrote his good news article it has been better. The promo for Geraldo's show tonight said there will be a general on discussing good news tonight.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

Some of the negative coverage is generated by an older generation of reporters who cut their teeth on the Vietnam war experience.

This SOB employee of UPI fails to mention the glowing praise the North Vietnamese Communist had for the American press. IMO the Communists' "most trusted man in America," Walter Cronkite was the biggest liar and cost the lives of thousands of Americans and tens of thousands of Vietnamese. Without his lies the Communists may have been willing to look for a way out in 1968. There is no question in my mind the American left wanted a U.S. defeat not just and end to the war.

Same today except they want us to be "rescued" by an international coalition of their leftist comrades.

And they should tell the truth at all times.

Uh.. the UPI employee is talking about the military. What about reporters?

Reporters, however, make their reputations on stories that effect change.

"Truth? I don't need no stinkin' truth -- I just want to make a difference. That's why I are a journalist."

[mark502inf]

"It's a troublesome issue that we're all very concerned about," said Army Chief of Staff Gen. John Keane at the same hearing.

Uh, Ms UPI PENTAGON Reporter, General Keane is the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army--has been for years. General Pete Schoomaker took charge over a month ago from Shinseki.

What do you think would happen to a Dallas newspaper sports reporter who didn't know Bill Parcells was the head coach of the Dallas Cowboys a month into the season? Yet these idiot reporters on the military don't know even the most basic facts.

this is a hotly debated political issue -- that media outlets should not be expected to parrot for the Bush administration.

And notice how she frames the issue up front in her story--that its either the negative/incomplete reporting we get now or else being a "parrot for the Bush administration". Just remember when you read the news, even-handed reporting or good news = "parrot for Bush administration".

[PLK]

I sincerely hope this was an "opinion" piece. If not, and is being reported as "news," this "reporter" should be fired ASAP.

[StriperSniper]

media outlets should not be expected to parrot for the Bush administration.

But it is O.K. for them to be a parrot for the leftist dims.

Actually, she was on Washington Journal on C-SPAN two Fridays ago, and she's not as bad as many. She was telling Brian about the many positive things she saw there, and how great the soliers were. Obviously the hardcore leftists didn't like that since they got vicious (asking her if the words 'ugly' and 'whore' meant anything to her!).

[Arpege92]

"The media lies non stop and then criticizes anyone who dares to complain."

They do? ;-}

[StriperSniper]

I sincerely hope this was an "opinion" piece. If not, and is being reported as "news," this "reporter" should be fired ASAP.

I don't know how UPI classified it, but I take it as opinion. It is sort of a 'travelogue' of her time in Iraq and reflection on the current controversy over coverage. My Post#30 mentions her appearance on C-SPAN, this is almost a recap of that. I just happened across another piece by her that is a pretty straight-forward news story.

Bremer: Kuwait, Saudi claim on Iraq unfair; should give up their reparation claims for 1990 invasion

[Jorge]

The media are the enemy because they are the enemy--because they are full of left-wing liars who deliberately twist the news.

As we all know. Thank God for FOX News and conservative talk radio.

These liberal liars no longer go unchallenged.