Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Iraq Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: The media in Iraq
EW3    11/28/2006 1:03:45 AM
This link has to get posted. It's a complicated story, but it's worth the read to understand just how deep the media complicity is. http://floppingaces2.blogspot.com/
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
sentinel28a       11/29/2006 5:50:51 AM
Link doesn't work, EW, but I think I can guess as to its content.
 
I don't think the media is quite complicit; I just think they're opinionated, woefully short-sighted, selfish, and lazy.  I doubt that even Maureen Dowd gets up in the morning thinking, "Gee, how can I help the insurgency kill Americans today?" Hell, it would be easier if they were open fifth columnists.  Instead, they're just stupid.
 
For one thing, the media relies way too much on local stringers, and only those local stringers who tell them what will make the news--blood and more blood.  If a bogus Iraqi policeman tells them that six Sunnis were burned alive, well, that's a lot more attention grabbing than "Seabees build a bridge."  Rather than send out reporters to actually find out what's going on, they throw money at locals, who figure out pretty quickly that the media will pay nicely for sensationalism.  That's the ones who are just in it for a buck; the ones that are really a threat are the stringers who actually work with the insurgency, like Bilial Hussein.  That's like asking Goebbels for an unbiased report on the Wehrmacht.  That's also where the laziness comes in--much easier to sit around the Palestine Hotel, nice and snug in the Green Zone, than risk your ass out there with the troops in a Humvee.
 
The selfishness and short-sightedness comes into play in that the media made their collective minds up in 2003 that the Iraq War was bad and, since it would hurt Bush to lose, we should lose the war.  Maybe not the reporters, but certainly the big wheels, who cut their teeth in Vietnam and have never progressed past it.  They don't want to hear about what good might be being done in Iraq: one, it doesn't sell papers well, and two, it goes against their preconcieved notions.  We're supposed to lose this one, dammit! It's not a good war, because Bush is President and we haven't had a good war since World War II and never will again!  Anything that doesn't work into the "America will lose, Bush is an imperialist genius idiot, and we have it coming" meme doesn't go, or it does so in very small doses. 
 
Another factor is that the editors remember Vietnam as a time when they could accuse soldiers freely of war crimes.  They can't do that anymore; even if it was PC to do so, the weight of history is against them.  They can still hold the military in contempt, though--which means that any news from the military is either a) cover-ups or b) propaganda.  Take the "airstrike" story in Ramadi faithfully repeated by the MSM--except there was no airstrike.  Even locals at Ramadi, who aren't known for their love of the US Army, have said there was no airstrike.  Doesn't matter, says the media--we already printed it, too late, and in any case those stupid soldiers are probably lying anyway to cover up something. 
 
Most of the media doesn't really want the insurgents to kill more American soldiers; they're not that heartless. (I make an exception for Michael Moore.) They don't realize that a loss in Iraq will mean a great deal of trouble for this nation in the future, trouble they might pay with their lives for.  (AQ doesn't make any distinction between those who voted against Bush and those who did--we're all infidels who need to convert or die.)  It's more important for them to sell papers and get Bush.  They'd rather lose the war than admit Bush might be right.
 
 
Quote    Reply

EW3       11/29/2006 6:10:49 AM
like I said this is a tangled story, but it looks like AP has been using questionable sources. 
what makes it even worse is that it appears they know they are. 
 
 
Quote    Reply

EW3    what do we know   11/30/2006 11:50:09 AM
This story continues to unfold and AP looks pretty guilty.  They could clear up any doubt instantly by producing the source of their stories "Capt. Jamil Hussein".    
The media pukes should be ashamed of themselves.
So what does the average citizen of the world really know about Iraq?  What percentage of the info that we have been fed is true?  from: http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006452.htm
 

I've been following up with CENTCOM on the Associated Press/sketchy sources brouhaha. Just heard this morning from Michael B. Dean, Lieutenant, U.S. Navy MNC-I Joint Operations Center, Public Affairs Officer:

From CPATT PAO:

BG Abdul-Kareem, the Ministry of Interior Spokesman, went on the record today stating that Capt. Jamil Hussein is not a police officer. He explained the coordinations among MOI, the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Defense in attempting to track down these bodies and their joint conclusion was that this was unsubstantiated rumor.

He went on to name several other false sources that have been used recently and appealed to the media to document their news before reporting. He went into some detail about the impact of the press carrying propaganda for the enemies of Iraq and thanked "the friends" who have brought this to their attention.

AP did attend the press conference.

 

I asked for more details, and Lt. Dean provided a summary and the first half of the press conference transcript. Some other interesting info here in addition to the false sources comments:

Ministry of Interior Weekly Press Conference Thursday, November 30, 2006

By Brig. Gen. Abdul Kareem Khalaf Al-Kenani
Ministry of Interior spokesman

Press conference synopsis:

1. Media, especially satellite news channels, must adhere to
responsible practices:

a. MOI is monitoring coverage, and will insist on corrections to
false reports.

b. Unnamed sources should not be used. Two recently named sources
do not work for MOI. Contact MOI PAO for official information.

c. Rumors are rampant, and media should be careful to check with
official sources about information to avoid spreading false rumors.

2. MOI succeeded in a number of operations against terrorists in
Baghdad.

a. The Baghdad Sniper was apprehended, and information gained from
him led to the arrest of 30 others in his organization.

b. Two unauthorized "courts" that had issued death fatwas were
broken up.

c. A kidnapping cell, including one that raped a young girl, was
arrested.

Statement:

This press conference will cover MOI operations from Nov. 23 to 29, 2006.

Before we start the weekly briefing, I have some points to highlight and to remind the brothers that work in the media, especially the Satellite television Channels. We meant by this note to stress the ministry of interior's intention that we believe in free press and truthful press, in order not to confuse what the free press presents and the misleading media show, where the latter's intention is to make the situation in Iraq worse than what it is.

The press release issued by the ministry of interior has three main points: First, a warning to the satellite TV. Channels continue broadcasting false news, and based on that we have formed a special observation room to monitor these TV stations; the purpose of this unit is to determine the fabricated and false news that hurts and gives the Iraqis a wrong picture that the security situation is very bad, when the facts are totally different.

After the monitoring process, we will contact those TV stations by presenting them with the mistakes and errors they committed by broadcasting such false news, hoping they will correct these false reports on their main news programs. But if they do not change those lying, false stories, then we will seek legal action against them.

For example, we have some of the respected news outlets that deal with news fast and have a relation with many TV channels and the media in general, who distributed a story quoting a person called Jamil Hussein. Afterward, we searched our sources in our staff for anyone by this name-- maybe he wore an MOI uniform and gave a different name to the reporter for money. And the second name used is Lt. Maythem.

However, all of you know that the ministry of interior has a large public affairs office and its official spokesman, and we are ready to answer any questions you may have. Therefore, you should contact MOI PAO for all your needs to get real, true news. Based on that, we strongly deny any relation with those two names. In order to serve you better and strengthen the relationship with MOI, do not take statements that have no meaning and do not represent any offi

 
Quote    Reply

Panther    sentinel28a    11/30/2006 5:54:39 PM
I don't know if your aware about a television program from the eighties that had Mike Wallace, Peter Jennings & Marine Colonel George M. Connell on it. Very informative. I believe it was called: "Under orders, Under fire". The basic's of what it all boiled down to: Reporter's should disregard the lives of our soldier's just too get a story, earning the Marine Colonel contempt. One of the big reason's i DO NOT TRUST quite a few journo's, as well as their putting biases into most of their stories!
 
Quote    Reply

EW3       11/30/2006 7:25:16 PM
available as video on demand
 
Quote    Reply

EW3    finally   11/30/2006 7:49:32 PM

 

Iraq Ministry Forms Unit to Monitor News

Iraq Interior Ministry Forms Unit to Monitor News Coverage, Threatens Legal Action

The Associated Press

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraq's Interior Ministry said Thursday it had formed a special unit to monitor news coverage and vowed to take legal action against journalists who failed to correct stories the ministry deemed to be incorrect.

Brig. Gen. Abdul-Karim Khalaf, spokesman for the ministry, said the purpose of the special monitoring unit was to find "fabricated and false news that hurts and gives the Iraqis a wrong picture that the security situation is very bad, when the facts are totally different."

 

He said offenders would be notified and asked to "correct these false reports on their main news programs. But if they do not change those lying, false stories, then we will seek legal action against them."

 

Khalaf explained the news monitoring unit at a weekly Ministry of Interior briefing. As an example, he cited coverage by The Associated Press of an attack Nov. 24 on a mosque in the Hurriyah district in northwest Baghdad.

 

The AP reported that six Sunni Muslims there were burned alive during the attack. The story quoted witnesses and police Capt. Jamil Hussein.

 

Khalaf said the ministry had no one on its staff by the name of Jamil Hussein.

 

"Maybe he wore an MOI (Ministry of Interior) uniform and gave a different name to the reporter for money," Khalaf said.

 

AP Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll rejected the accusation. "The implication that we may have given money to the captain is false. The AP does not pay for information," she said.

 

Khalaf said the ministry had dispatched a team to the Hurriyah neighborhood and to the morgue but found no witnesses or evidence of burned bodies.

 

The spokesman said the ministry had a large public relations staff and said they should be contacted by the media to "get real, true news."

 

U.S. military had no comment on the immolations on the day of the attack but subsequently issued a statement, citing the Iraqi army as saying it had found nothing to substantiate the report.

 

U.S. Navy Lt. Michael B. Dean, a public affairs officer for the multi-national force, later demanded that the story be retracted because he said police Capt. Jamil Hussein "is not a Baghdad police officer or an MOI employee."

 

His allegations were checked with the AP reporter, who had been in routine contact for more than two years with Hussein, in some cases sitting in his office in the Yarmouk police station in west Baghdad. Hussein wore a police uniform during the face-to-face meetings.

 

Hussein confirmed the burning story on three separate occasions. AP reporters also went to the neighborhood and found three witnesses to the immolations who told nearly identical stories. Since then more people in the neighborhood have told about the incident in a similar fashion. Pictures of the Mustafa mosque where the incident occurred show that it is badly damaged by explosives and shows signs of scorching from fire.

 

Scrawled in what appears to be spray paint on the mosque compound wall is the phrase "blood wanted," which Iraqis say has appeared on many structures in areas of heavy Shiite-Sunni sectarian conflict throughout Baghdad.

 

The phrase is a warning to the sect that is the minority in the neighborhood, Sunnis in the case of the region around the Mustafa mosque in Hurriyah, that they will be killed if they return.

 

Under Saddam Hussein's regime, the government imposed censorship on local media and severely restricted foreign media coverage, monitoring transmissions and sending secret police to follow journalists. Those who violated the rules were expelled and in some cases jailed.

 

 

 
Quote    Reply

EW3    finally   11/30/2006 7:53:31 PM
"Under Saddam Hussein's regime, the government imposed censorship on local media and severely restricted foreign media coverage, monitoring transmissions and sending secret police to follow journalists. Those who violated the rules were expelled and in some cases jailed."
 
Note the AP jab, what a bunch of arseholes.  Why is this paragraph salient? 
Trying to compare the current regime with Hussein are we? 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

shek       12/2/2006 9:32:36 PM
EW3,
 
Thanks for the story.  I'd agree with you that there are definitely certain elements within the media who have made it their own personal jihad to influence the public perception battlefield.  However, that being said, the actions of some do not generalize to all media. 
 
Having met and spoken with the senior military correspondents for the WaPo and WSJ, and having had several media embeds during my time in Iraq, I've found the majority of media that I've met to be very supportive of individual American soldiers and supportive of the United States.  This is not to be confused with them necessarily being support of current policy and strategy; however, I think it is dangerous to build rhetoric to the point where criticism of policy/strategy becomes conflated with not being patriotic, as it artificially stifles healthy debate.
Also, I had an interesting conversation with a colleague the other day, and interestingly, the most trusted military correspondent for any of the major printed publications based on his experience works for the NYT.  So, I would posit that one must not judge a book by its cover and blindly reject articles based on their printed source (this doesn't mean, however, that you shouldn't blindly trust).
Bottomline, exposing fallacies such as this and others is a great check and balance on the media, just as they need to serve a role in providing a check and balance on the executive, legislative, etc. (as long as they don't violate laws to do so).
 
Shek
 
P.S.  Swhitebull, if you read this, I'd appreciate it if you'd email me at conshek at hotmail.  Thanks.
 
Quote    Reply

EW3       12/3/2006 3:50:49 AM
would that be John Burns shek? 
 
 
Quote    Reply

shek       12/3/2006 9:26:29 AM
I don't think so, although IIRC, John Burns is well respected.  I actually didn't recognize the name when my friend told me it.  When I read through the DoD Early Bird to catch the day's major headlines, I hardly even look at the newspaper that printed anymore - I typically only pay attention to the author's name.  However, I was surprised when he mentioned that name that I didn't recognize it.  I'll ask this week and let you know who it was. 
 
The context in which my friend discussed the correspondent was Abu Ghraib, and the correspondent spoke that the military hurt its own case by not engaging the media on the subject.  So, instead of the story breaking with the Army talking about an investigation and how it was going to hold those responsible (which it has, to an extent), the story led with the now infamous pictures.  As we all know, first impressions are often the lasting impressions when it comes to media stories, and so the Army lost the intiative and never has regained the initiative on the story. 
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics