An Iraq Veteran Sees Media Bias. Do you?

[Leader]

The good news you don't get from Iraq

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Something struck me as odd this fall as I watched a U.S. satellite news broadcast here in my Baghdad office. Something just didn't seem right. There was the usual tug-of-war between presidential candidates, a story about the Boston Red Sox and a blurb about another explosion in Iraq. The latter story showed the expected images of smoke and debris and people frantically running for cover - images that have become the accepted norm in the minds of many Americans thanks, or should I say no thanks, to the media.

There were no smiling soldiers, no mention of rebuilding efforts, no heartwarming stories about honor and sacrifice. I could swear I've seen that "stuff" here.

I've become somewhat callused to this kind of seesaw reporting because every day I work with the news agencies that manufacture it. However, many service members shake their heads in frustration each time they see their daily rebuilding efforts ignored by the media in favor of the more "sensational" car bomb and rocket attack stories. Not to say that tragedies don't happen - Iraq is a war zone - but there is so much more happening that gets overlooked if not ignored.

Army Sgt. Addie Collins' Kicks for Kids program is an example of this. Three months ago this Army Reservist from Los Angeles asked her friends and family to forgo sending the usual box of goodies, and instead send a few pairs of kid-sized shoes, which she would hand out to Iraqi children she'd seen walking barefoot. Friends and family told friends and family, and today, 10,000 pairs later, Collins is outfitting an entire Ramadi community with sneakers, sandals and boots.

Where's her morning talk show appearance?
[...]
Marine Cpl. Isaac D. Pacheco of Northern Kentucky enlisted in the Marines on Sept. 12, 2001, and arrived in Iraq last fall. He serves with the Combined Press Information Center in Baghdad.

More here: http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.d...0331/1021/edit

Reactions:

There's Optimism on the Front

Taking a stand

Good news from Iraq, Part 19

Chrenkoff’s Good News From Iraq

[igofast]

With so many different news outlets, broadcasting the news in America is extremely competative. Broadcasting the news is not about giving the news, it is about selling advertising. The stories that are told are the ones that make the most money, period.

The bias is slim, if any. Blame the dollar if someone must be blamed.

[Snouter]

Originally Posted by Leader

...many service members shake their heads in frustration each time they see their daily rebuilding efforts ignored by the media in favor of the more "sensational" car bomb and rocket attack stories.

The left wing news does not want to see success as a result of power. The left wing news could report every automobile related death or injury, or every potentially deadly disease spread by homosexual activity, but they prefer to attack the effort to step into the filthy Muslim world.

The did the same sort of thing with the tsunami. The left wing media counted the alleged deaths like it was a game show. Meanwhile, the suckers who donated money don't even comprehend that the Muslims in Indonesia hate them for it.

[axoangelq]

my boyfriend says the same thing. Its like yeah, theres fighting, and exlposions, and car bombs, but there are so many people playing with the children who have lost parents, teaching, rebuilding, that we think we are sending "our children" to their deaths by sending them to IRaq. What we fail to see is "our children" helping actual children survive. Helping families survive. I don't even watch the world news anymore.

I blame the nielsen ratings.

[Powerboss]

Originally Posted by igofast

With so many different news outlets, broadcasting the news in America is extremely competative. Broadcasting the news is not about giving the news, it is about selling advertising. The stories that are told are the ones that make the most money, period.

The bias is slim, if any. Blame the dollar if someone must be blamed.

Most reporters go into the career in hopes of changing things, meaning activism of some sort.
It's also no secret that most reporters are ideologically more liberal.


Carole Simpson/AbC News.... On CSpan a few months ago.

SIMPSON: I look at this map, and I'm like, "What the heck is happening?" For the past year, I am bringing news into the schools. I was concerned that all research was showing young people in America are not watching the news; they're not reading the news, and this is frightening to me, from someone who got into journalism in the 1960s because we wanted to change America. We thought if people understood the problems, that we'd get solutions to some of the problems. So when I find out that our young people are noooot being aware of what's going on, um... ABC has allowed me to travel about this city, and I leave for a big red state tomorrow (Laughing) Missouri. (Laughing.)

More:

SIMPSON: I got a little map here of pre-Civil War free versus slave states. I wish you could see it in color and large. But if you look at it, the red states are all done in the South, and you have the Nebraska territories, the New Mexico territories and the Kansas territories, but the Pacific Northwest and California were not slave states. The northeast was not. It looks like the map of 2004, and when you say, "Let's let the states decide,"I remember what the states decided when they had slavery. I think they're going quickly after social programs, despite what he says. (tepid applause) I think we're going to get a roll back on all kind of things. Affirmative action is a bad word; liberal is a bad word; gay is a bad word, diversity. All these words that are perfectly fine words now are these touchstones, these trigger points, and that frightens me.
Source


Joe Lockhart even admitted it the other day on Howard Kurtz's CNN show.


I would invite you to read the book "bias" by Bernard Goldberg.
He's a liberal who worked at CBS for almost 30 years.
I'll even send/loan you my audiobook.

[igofast]

Originally Posted by Snouter

The did the same sort of thing with the tsunami. The left wing media counted the alleged deaths like it was a game show. Meanwhile, the suckers who donated money don't even comprehend that the Muslims in Indonesia hate them for it.

Shocking. Helping people is now supporting muslim terrorism. I think you're crazy.

Originally Posted by Powerboss

Most reporters go into the career in hopes of changing things, meaning activism of some sort.

And then they realize the ones that make any money and actually do have any influence have sold their soul, so they do it too.

[Powerboss]

Eh, I don't agree. What is coming out in the network news is completely one sided.

Who does it gain, and how does it financially gain reporters or networks to promote only the negative picture of what is happening in Iraq?

[Sinclair]

If money can be made pandering to the right as opposed to the left, then it will be made.

Case in point: Fox News. Fox News is doing pretty well for itself, isn't it?

[Sinclair]

Then, of course, is the old adage "If it bleeds, it leads". People aren't interested in knowing that things are going right. They will become intersted in something REALLY REALLY 110% SPLENDIFEROUS happening. But the thing that will make 'em turn on the radio, watch the TV, check the net, or read the papers, is something horrible. A schoolbus full of 6-year-olds exploding will get more readership than a turnaround in an African country which will get more readership than things going according to plan.

[igofast]

Originally Posted by Powerboss

Eh, I don't agree. What is coming out in the network news is completely one sided.

Who does it gain, and how does it financially gain reporters or networks to promote only the negative picture of what is happening in Iraq?

Well it looks like you've been banned today, so you won't see this, but the networks gain financially because more people watch the horrific stories than the heartwarming stories. More people watching means higher ratings. Higher ratings means more revenue from commercials.

It's really that simple. Horrific stories are more sensationalistic, which makes more money. It's all about money, money, and then more money.

[Feenix566]

it's a shame, because the reconstruction efforts in Iraq really are making a difference. people ought to know that what we do really does make a difference in the world.

[Savannah]

I agree that the media are decidedly biased. Frankly, I think in some cases that a news person's personal hatred shows through loud and clear - Dan Rather being one of those persons. They don't bring out a lot of things as they are, but rather as they want them to be.

I'm fortunate to be able to get emails, etc. once in awhile from the front lines that spell out all the good things. Personally, I think the bias in the media is aimed at demoralizing the military as well as the American people.

[Sinclair]

It's aimed at making money. If people cared more about Iraq being rebuilt than Iraq getting blown up, the news would be different. Blaming the media is silly, because the media is just a symptom of society as a whole.

They have to sell papers, get people to watch TV, get people to listen, get people to surf the web, so as to get people to the ads. It's about moneymoneymoney.

[igofast]

Originally Posted by Sinclair

It's aimed at making money. If people cared more about Iraq being rebuilt than Iraq getting blown up, the news would be different. Blaming the media is silly, because the media is just a symptom of society as a whole.

They have to sell papers, get people to watch TV, get people to listen, get people to surf the web, so as to get people to the ads. It's about moneymoneymoney.

Hey, that sounds familiar, I think I just said that!

[Turbostang]

Marine Cpl. Isaac D. Pacheco of Northern Kentucky enlisted in the Marines on Sept. 12, 2001, and arrived in Iraq last fall. He serves with the Combined Press Information Center in Baghdad.

I wonder how may people caught that.

Of course the media is biased. People who are upset now about how "one sided" the media is against Iraq are either forgetting or delibertately omitting how much flag waving and building up the case for the war before and after the invasion started. Case and point: How many people still believe that Iraq was responsible or at least had something to do with 9/11? Before the election it was roughly half the population! How much has the mainstream media worked to dispel that myth?

Of course there is the obvious question: How many of the people who are claiming that the media is being "one sided" against the war are in fact refusing to face reality (such as with the non-existent WMD) and scapegoating the media for poor policy and decision making on the part of our leadership?