Spring Break
Media is misrepresenting the war
Andrew Browning
Issue date: 8/27/07 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 2 next >
Our government has done a very good job of censoring the images that would make the Iraq War far too visceral of an experience for many people. Americans can stand to watch incredibly grotesque movies like "Saw" and "The Hills Have Eyes," but as soon as images of flag-draped coffins are released to the public, some viewers are sickened and want nothing more than to ignore what they just saw so they can return to their own televised ignorance.
Since the beginning of the war in 2003, the media coverage of Iraq has been anything but "fair and balanced."
The whole idea of having embedded reporters is an oxymoron. How can you have professional journalists who are supposed to be reporting objectively actually do their jobs if they only see one side of the story? I understand the reasons behind having reporters attached to military units, but I also believe it was a way to beat the war drum even louder, without raising too many questions.
It seems most journalists are more fascinated with the shock and awe of the war rather than the human experience. They remind me of children watching their first fireworks show; oohing and ahhing at all of the pretty colors, even though many of the colors did crippling damage to the infrastructure, along with injuring and killing many innocent people.
The journalists have set themselves up for failure by not reporting both sides of the story. Contrary to popular belief, you do not have to agree with the president or his cronies. America would have been better off to have journalists who questioned the reasons for invading rather than accepting the invasion as a matter of fact.
Nightly news is worthless if you want quality information about what is going on in Iraq. Of course the reporters will showcase the "highlights" of the ongoing operations. The names of these missions are usually adjectives that provide a strong authoritative message aiming to justify our place in the Middle East. They are names like "Operation Iron Grip" and "Operation All American Tiger." But these operations usually do little to slow down the violence in Iraq.
Since the beginning of the war in 2003, the media coverage of Iraq has been anything but "fair and balanced."
The whole idea of having embedded reporters is an oxymoron. How can you have professional journalists who are supposed to be reporting objectively actually do their jobs if they only see one side of the story? I understand the reasons behind having reporters attached to military units, but I also believe it was a way to beat the war drum even louder, without raising too many questions.
It seems most journalists are more fascinated with the shock and awe of the war rather than the human experience. They remind me of children watching their first fireworks show; oohing and ahhing at all of the pretty colors, even though many of the colors did crippling damage to the infrastructure, along with injuring and killing many innocent people.
The journalists have set themselves up for failure by not reporting both sides of the story. Contrary to popular belief, you do not have to agree with the president or his cronies. America would have been better off to have journalists who questioned the reasons for invading rather than accepting the invasion as a matter of fact.
Nightly news is worthless if you want quality information about what is going on in Iraq. Of course the reporters will showcase the "highlights" of the ongoing operations. The names of these missions are usually adjectives that provide a strong authoritative message aiming to justify our place in the Middle East. They are names like "Operation Iron Grip" and "Operation All American Tiger." But these operations usually do little to slow down the violence in Iraq.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Ryan
posted 8/27/07 @ 8:02 PM EST
I don't know what "news" you are watching but I see plenty of "carnage" from Iraq. Of course, you have been there and have seen what is going on in person right? This conspiracy crap is getting a little old. (Continued…)
C.J.
posted 8/28/07 @ 1:41 AM EST
I find it hard to believe the seriousness of anybody who is spoon-fed all their news through the talking heads on television. Most people can read much faster than a news anchor announces and every major television news source has online versions of the exact same stories. (Continued…)
Post a Comment