3,915
That's the number of US troops killed in Iraq as of yesterday, an editorial in today's Los Angeles Times points out. It's a figure that doesn't get much attention in the mainstream media because it's not one of those round figures like 2,000, or (tragically) 4,000. The editorial also points out that yesterday's edition printed an unusual sight: a photograph of a flag-draped coffin. The paper got away with that because the coffin arrived at a civilian rather than a military airport where photographers are banned from taking such pictures.
Another thing you probably haven't seen lately is images like the front-page photograph in Wednesday's Times, which showed the flag-draped coffin of Army Sgt. David J. Hart of Lake View Terrace as it arrived on an airport tarmac. Such images are rare, partly because of a media tendency to see the commonplace as unworthy of coverage and partly because of a calculated effort by the Bush administration to prevent the American people from seeing them. ...
You also may not have heard that 2007 was the deadliest year yet for U.S. troops in Iraq: 899 lost their lives, surpassing the previous high of 850 in 2004. A few newspaper and TV websites continue to list casualties, but these have nowhere near the effect of "Nightline" anchor Ted Koppel's 2004 recitation of the names of the then-721 dead. The Tyndall Report, which monitors network news broadcasts, shows that less time was devoted to Iraq coverage in 2007 than in any previous year of the conflict.
The war remains an important issue in the presidential campaign, but candidates from both parties have stopped raising it as often as they once did. The apparent success of the "surge," which has reduced both the overall violence in Iraq and the number of U.S. casualties, has unnerved critics who last spring were calling for an immediate pullout. If there's still a chance of victory, doesn't it argue for staying the course? As politicians dither, the C-17s keep delivering a steady cargo of coffins.The vast majority of them are seen only by military personnel and the families of the dead. [Emphasis added]
The clear point of the editorial is to lambaste the current administration for imposing the gag order on pictures of coffins arriving from Iraq, and it is hard to disagree with the issue raised: a free press should not have that kind of muzzle forced upon it in order for the government to manage public opinion.
What the editorialist conveniently neglects to point out is the failure of the press to do its job in the overall coverage of the war, especially in the last year, even though it cites the Tyndall Report. Fewer articles on the war have appeared, and when they do, they often are buried deep within the paper. It's as if the war itself is old news, even as Americans and Iraqis continue dying in this illegal and misbegotten war. Instead, Americans are soothed by news of a successful surge without being made aware of the continuing cost in lives of the ongoing military activity.
And without the pressure of an outraged public over the continuing carnage, the candidates don't feel compelled to confront the entire issue of that war and the one in Afghanistan and the continuing drain on our national treasury. None of the candidates have to make the connection between that drain (estimates of which vary from $150 to $300 million per day) and the current economic problems the US faces.
Sorry, LA Times, you don't get off the hook just because you can't publish rows of flag-draped coffins on a military tarmac. By failing to regularly publish hard news about the war and placing it where you readers can't ignore it, you and all the other news outlets are just as guilty of managing the news as the government. You failed to perform your duty.
Another thing you probably haven't seen lately is images like the front-page photograph in Wednesday's Times, which showed the flag-draped coffin of Army Sgt. David J. Hart of Lake View Terrace as it arrived on an airport tarmac. Such images are rare, partly because of a media tendency to see the commonplace as unworthy of coverage and partly because of a calculated effort by the Bush administration to prevent the American people from seeing them. ...
You also may not have heard that 2007 was the deadliest year yet for U.S. troops in Iraq: 899 lost their lives, surpassing the previous high of 850 in 2004. A few newspaper and TV websites continue to list casualties, but these have nowhere near the effect of "Nightline" anchor Ted Koppel's 2004 recitation of the names of the then-721 dead. The Tyndall Report, which monitors network news broadcasts, shows that less time was devoted to Iraq coverage in 2007 than in any previous year of the conflict.
The war remains an important issue in the presidential campaign, but candidates from both parties have stopped raising it as often as they once did. The apparent success of the "surge," which has reduced both the overall violence in Iraq and the number of U.S. casualties, has unnerved critics who last spring were calling for an immediate pullout. If there's still a chance of victory, doesn't it argue for staying the course? As politicians dither, the C-17s keep delivering a steady cargo of coffins.The vast majority of them are seen only by military personnel and the families of the dead. [Emphasis added]
The clear point of the editorial is to lambaste the current administration for imposing the gag order on pictures of coffins arriving from Iraq, and it is hard to disagree with the issue raised: a free press should not have that kind of muzzle forced upon it in order for the government to manage public opinion.
What the editorialist conveniently neglects to point out is the failure of the press to do its job in the overall coverage of the war, especially in the last year, even though it cites the Tyndall Report. Fewer articles on the war have appeared, and when they do, they often are buried deep within the paper. It's as if the war itself is old news, even as Americans and Iraqis continue dying in this illegal and misbegotten war. Instead, Americans are soothed by news of a successful surge without being made aware of the continuing cost in lives of the ongoing military activity.
And without the pressure of an outraged public over the continuing carnage, the candidates don't feel compelled to confront the entire issue of that war and the one in Afghanistan and the continuing drain on our national treasury. None of the candidates have to make the connection between that drain (estimates of which vary from $150 to $300 million per day) and the current economic problems the US faces.
Sorry, LA Times, you don't get off the hook just because you can't publish rows of flag-draped coffins on a military tarmac. By failing to regularly publish hard news about the war and placing it where you readers can't ignore it, you and all the other news outlets are just as guilty of managing the news as the government. You failed to perform your duty.
Labels: Free Press, Iraq War
posted by Diane at 4:05 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home