New Coverage Opinions

[bryan27]

I had to burst out laughing when Tom Brokaw asked a reporter in Iraq "Is Iraq TV still broadcasting?" last night. When all Tom had to do was turn around and see that it was on one of the TV screens behind him. I also looked at one of our screens and Iraq TV was on with it's usual singing and flag waving pictures, which the reporter then told Tom that was what was on. What an idiot :rolleyes:

Our local Fox affiliate must not have liked the Fox News coverage because they switched to CNN after 45 minutes. :lol:

CCTV-9 has surprisingly good war coverage. Continious coverage ceased at Noon EST. If there's nothing new why keep going.:D

C-Span must pick the most unintelligent people to talk to duing their live call-in shows :eek:

Other than that I've been watching reports on the OTA Nets, Nile TV, EuroNews, & Dubai Business Channel.

[Scott Greczkowski]

I have fox news tuned in on my XM Radio and have NBC tuned in on my little TV on my desk. :)

[firephoto]

Been watching CNN mostly. Switched though the channels last night and all I kept seeing was discussions among analysyts on the other channels.
I'm not sure who the camera shots belong too but they all seem to be using the same camera feeds.
CNN has a reporter in Baghdad and they are getting bombed right now there.
Oliver North and Jeraldo Rivera on Fox within minutes of each other isn't my idea of good news.

edited:

CNN's Nic Robertson seems to be getting heavily censored by Iraqi officials now. They are telling him not to report any details or locations of what's going on. He seems to be just able to describe the sounds of the explosions and what the AAA looks like. :(

edited again:

CNN reported last night that they have over 600 people in Kuwait to support the news coverage. I never imagined that they would have this many people there for their news coverage.

[gcutler]

BBC America has had alot of Pre-emtping with BBC World News, so I've been watching that as much as possible.

[John Corn]

Anyone else find that the media outlets (especially the TV) seem way to eager and impatient to get the war going?

Watching CNN, it seemed like they were upset when they were told by analysts that they could have to wait 12, 24, or 48 hours for more action. I even saw one reporter ask a soldier if he was "anxious" to start fighting. To them it is nothing more than just a ratings competition and a chance for journalists to boost their careers.

[gcutler]

It did seem like they were reporting a boxing match and were anxious to start the bout.

[bryan27]

I noticed that too. The TV outlets are trying to get any little thing they can. One of the net anchors looked pissed when their correspondant on the ground wouldn't tell their location.

I have also noticed the TV outlets will report events BEFORE they are confirmed, but won't admit when they got something wrong. Or will report an opinion as fact.

It seems to me the International TV outlets (that I receive) are doing a much better job at reporting real news and keeping opinions, unconfirmed reports, and rumors to a minimum.

[firephoto]

CNN seems to holding back all the rumors and such pretty good. When something comes up that is reported widely on the other channels they will finally say something to the effect that they have unconfirmed reports of something and will tell a little about it.

Some of the other channels were reporting last night that an Iraqi division surrendered then later CNN just said they had reports of that, but it wasn't confirmed, and they didn't say anything else about it. They never reported on the Apache that was supposedly shot down either. I've been watching the BBC too and they seem to have pretty good reporting tactics too.

[Punkitup]

I find CNN is putting the most restrained face on their reporting, keeping flag waving, flashy video game graphics and contrived tugs at the heartstrings to a minimum. Although I switch back and forth to catch the actual in the field reports on all the networks. I do find the embedded journalist program to be a fascinating experiment, and feel that inevitably it can only show our troops to be the magnificent individuals they are in a true to life, human way, stripped of the fog of patriotic fervor.    

We now have troops in the field and as a veteran of our ill-advised, largely un-facilitated foray into Beirut in 1983 I support their need to be supplied with whatever is required to bring this to a swift conclusion, decisively in their favor. I didn’t want to be there and still fear undesirable repercussions for years to come. But now that we have to make the best of a bad situation, are objective should be to save the lives of as many Americans, Britons and non-combatant Iraqis as possible. And being military minded I comprehend that using overwhelming focused power to achieve these ends is not necessarily a dichotomy.

I have got to tell you though I think the whole lead up to this war from a media perspective has by and large been a shameful example of bandwagon jumping. The Bush administration never came to the American people and spoke to them in plain language about the open questions here like, reconstruction, the probability of increased terrorism, and what precedents are we setting for the future. And the media never really asked the hard questions or did any sober investigative reports.

To that point what follows is an excerpt from a letter I wrote not long ago….   

    Like I said I expect a leap to the bandwagon from a segment of the public, it’s a defense mechanism for those with no true conception of war, and a means to an end for those with no concern for it. What I do not expect or accept is the news media to be gleefully handing each of these lemmings an American flag as the Bush administration herds them towards the plunge. (I refer mostly to TV here) Tune in any cable news outlet and the picture has been the same for the last year and a half. We see Bush speaking, he is once again doing his best Winston Churchill poorly, each time he pauses for effect the applause come from an audience hand picked to be in congruous with his agenda. He speaks for a half an hour and says absolutely nothing; it’s just a revolving diatribe of faux patriotic sloganeering geared towards educing a xenophobic response. The speech ends and we are returned to the talking heads of the television news desk, do they question anything he has said, do they call for a factual confirmation of any assertions he may have made? No, and as a matter of fact they are more likely to support their own duplicity by tritely saying something like “you know the public historically rallies round the President during times of war”. Did I miss a memo here? Rally round the troops fine, but rally round the President, when did they makeup this rule? And did they decide that journalistic integrity and the right to dissent should be suspended as well while all this rallying was going on? No, a harsh word about Mr. Bush shall not be spoken, or it’s time for a dissenter barbeque, complete with cries of “get your fresh tasty anti-American here”. I would expect this from the likes of FOX News, as Rupert Murdock’s conglomeration of dimwitted sportscasters, weathermen and tabloid touts would report a Presidential bowel movement as an Immaculate Conception. But by and large all the networks are like this, they long ago unquestioningly hitched there satellite trucks to the Bush bandwagon and helped to trundle the American public along to his Patriotic War. They were in fact the best primers of the public sensibilities that the Bush administration could have hoped for, they have been broadcasting from their flashy, flag draped, sports telestrator equipped studios for months now in anticipation of war. 


I stated in my opening paragraph here that I find CNN to be fairly reserved, but the video game nature of the reporting by all the networks (MSNBC being the worst in this vein) and the disconnect it promotes from the sad actualities of war is disconcerting. I mean while they are pointing to their room size maps, telestrators and custom 3D animations to describe an action it hardly promotes a grasp by the public of the horrendous trauma involved in that same action for both friend and foe alike.

To that ends here is a further excerpt from that same letter….

   An example of how detached from reality these talking heads on TV are. Last night Sue and I listened as one of these has-been military officers supplementing his pension at one of the networks stated with all sincerity “Thank God for the Abrams Tank”. We looked at each other in disbelief as if on cue and then started to review our admittedly sad recollection of Bible verse… And on the 7th day God created the Abrams tank? No, that’s not it…. And the meek shall inherit the Abrams Tank? No, that’s not it… Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Yeah, that’s the one.


Thanks for letting me ramble, look forward to reading others opinions.

Pray for Peace
James – USMC 1980-84
 
 
  

[Nick]

James, having been in Beirut in 1983, you have every right to be bitter. When the suits try to run a war, for the grunts it is like fighting with one arm tied behind your back. You have my gratitude and respect. Thanks for your service to America and for your insightful post. Very provocative.

Nick

[Punkitup]

Originally posted by Nick
James, having been in Beirut in 1983, you have every right to be bitter.
Nick  

Nick, I do not consider myself bitter (much). I am however very wary of people like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfawitz, but I am on the whole pragmatic.

But I nonetheless thank you for your kind words. I am proud of my service, but I would hope that this open mindedness can be extended to all who ask questions about this war regardless of prior service status. Open dialog and respect for each other is what separates or nation from the likes of Saddam. That having been said it is no accident that I sign my posts the way I do (on this DBS forum only), I am very proud of today’s young Marines and the examples of their abilities they are showing. When it comes down to the bottom line they are fighting for the support and love of each other, and when it’s possible a taste of humanity and compassion for those they encounter, aspirations to some type of patriotic glory do not factor in. They are in short, magnificent.

But I digress, this topic is not about me, the Marines or Nick’s kind regards. It is in fact about News Coverage, and I would like to here you guy’s consideration of the coverage leading up to the war and as it continues now?


Are we getting investigative reports to supplement the small slice that is coming from the embedded journalist?
What do you think of the embedded journalist experiment?
Should there be more aggressive reporting into the plans for reconstruction?
Should they be taking a closer look at the potential for a burgeoning of the Terrorist ranks?
Are there hard calls in the offing for the Israeli/Palestinian issue in order to offset our image in the Arab world, and should these be reported on?
Why are we not seeing more Arab-American supporters on the networks, wouldn’t this help our image?
Why the lack of media appearances by members of the Iraqi national Congress? Have they been asked to be quiet, or are they withholding comment till they see if they are ultimately put into power?
What do you think of the high-tech flashy television studio sets? Are they fluff, or a way to interpret the info? 
Would it be an interesting idea for the American networks to poll there resources (and money) and make available an Arabic translated channel to people in the Middle-east, free for anyone who wanted to pick it up via satillite? 


I could go on and on, but you guys get the idea. I look forward to hearing your opinions.

Pray for Peace
James – USMC 1980-84