The American media's use of freedom of speech has long been an ideal protected under our constitution, which we in the military are sworn to defend. But what about when the media actively engages in undermining the security of US forces abroad? I think that entitles me to flip the bird to the media outlets in question. And I'm not talking about jackass Mahdi Army lovers over at Kos (this draft-dodging asshole accused my buddy Brandon Friedman of being a neo-con, the last guy on earth I would label such), but rather large-time rags like CNN. They published the story about security precautions being taken in the Green Zone following numerous rocket attacks. There's the news, and then there's sensationalism and relishing of violence. Do they not understand that the reason the enemy does this is because it gets such huge press? Are they so blinded by their hatred of BushCheneyHalliburtonCo that they don't even understand they are getting their fellow countrymen killed? I'm not saying that everything should read like military propaganda, but please don't enable the enemy if you are an American media outlet. I have also been flabbergasted by the lack of coverage on the militia thugs getting squashed for launching rockets (smart move on their part to go with the ceasefire). There's some MNF-I press releases here, here, and here. Also, for a really good story, check out Angry American who was out on the streets of Baghdad (praise to those that have more courage than I). When I get back to the states, I want to buy this man a beer...I also would like to leave a burning bag of dogshit at the front door of CNN's corporate headquarters in Atlanta. 
Right here, CNN...Right Here
See what the others have said:
13 comments:
I'm conflicted about this (possibly because I'm not the one getting shot at) But I'm not sure I want an editor in a news room filtering what he or she is going to tell me about what's going on in the world through red, white and blue colored glasses.
The news media isn't (or shouldn't be) a propaganda arm for any side or cause other than the truth.
Where I'm conflicted is that I also believe there are situations where it's appropriate to take the safety of service members into consideration. I think that's something most people agree on.
All in all, I don't want the press trying to be patriotic any more than I want them trying to be unpatriotic. Their job is to report the news.
If there was a serious demand for relevant news I wouldn't be able to predict what would be on the major cable news networks every day. More often than not there is a story about A)Crime B)Natural Disasters C)Economic Woes D)Political Punditry. Taken as a whole, most of the content shown on the major media outlets are shown not for thier inherent newsworthiness, but more for thier ability to catch your attention and thereby drive up the network's ratings. The main reason for this of course is the general state of apathy our country seems to be stuck in. Don't blame the media. Blame yourself.
Sir,
Not that that's not a darling pic. (is that what you look like without the disguse??), but the article in question -- I'm not really seeing what's so bad about it. One doesn't wish to appear uninformed, but . . . yeah, I'm not getting this one.
Kath
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the blog post From the Front: 04/01/2008 News and Personal dispatches from the front lines.
All,
Not saying the media needs to be Uncle Sam propaganda, I just wish they wouldn't actively undermine our military efforts and endanger Americans (hence the nasty picture I swiped from someone else via Google Images).
Do they not understand that the reason the enemy does this is because it gets such huge press? Are they so blinded by their hatred of BushCheneyHalliburtonCo that they don't even understand they are getting their fellow countrymen killed?
Nix,
This is a really serious charge. Could you explain a little more about how the CNNs of the world are getting Americans killed with this article? Does the following accurately capture the logic of your criticism?
a) Insurgents attack the green zone mostly to get attention.
b) CNN articles are big-time attention.
c) Therefore, CNN articles reward attacks, causing more of them than if CNN did not report on the attacks.
A-ro
Amen brother!
A-ro,
Yes that's the gist of it. Perhaps it was a bit harsh, and a bit mocking. It really is supposed to be partly humorous. Yes the media attention does enable enemies to conduct attacks (since it gets that "spectacular" attention). I'm mostly upset that CNN leaked our security requirements, that stuff is supposed to be guarded very seriously. I don't think what the media does is criminal, but I think it's kosher to mock them.
I am totally on board with mocking the media.
A-ro
The media can publish information that can give away our tactics, strategy and strength of force.By doing that they can expose our forces to danger they need not be exposed to.
They should report on our military just like a sports reporter reports on the home town team. The military is our home town team. We want them to win. So the media shouldn't tell the other team things that will hamper our winning.
Just like any sports reporter they can criticize the team.....after the fact, when the information is no longer useful to the other team.
The media sometimes give the impression they would be happy if our team lost. Such is the case when they seem to trumpet the enemies successes and fail to report or minimize our success.
I'm with you LT. The media is often misleading or downright wrong in their reporting of the war in Iraq. Thank God for the blogosphere. I get my picture of what is going on in Iraq from blogs like yours, Michael Yon, Michael Totten, Bill Roggio, Iraq the Model, and many others. I'd be willing to bet that I know more about what is actually going on in Iraq than most of the news editors at the major dailies and TV networks.
I've quit reading newspapers and only watch TV occasionally.
Keep your head down and thanks for your blog.
Thx, Tin Ma'am, you rock.
Jimmy J,
I am also a conservative-leaning lib in the puget sound area (when not in Iraq). Thank you for your patronage, sir.
jimmy j.,
You hit the nail on the head. more often than not the main media outlets seem to be almost celebrating casualties taken or large-scale attacks on US or Iraqi forces.
I can't remember the last time an American "victory" of sorts was celebrated int he news. However, you do hear a whole lot about how many American were injured or kia when something happens.
You are absolutely right. The military is our home team. American as a whole needs to support the men and women out there just doing their jobs.
I don't have the title but a couple of weeks ago a Harvard study came out that correlated domestic political commentary against the war with the rise and fall of U.S. and Iraqi civilian casualties. It basically found that when U.S. sentiments are judged to be against the war, the other side thinks engaging more frequently could increase their advantages.
I don't know if the same could be said for the slant of media coverage, but would think the same would hold true.
Post a Comment