Jump to content

Editors complain about APs coverage of Iraq


southsider2k5

Recommended Posts

Ms. Goudreau, for one, found the discussion useful. By the end, she said, editors were acknowledging that even in their own hometowns, "we're more likely to focus on people who are killed than on the positive news out of a school."

 

This is the true nature of the issue. Let's face it, from Baghdad to Biloxi, "If it bleeds, it leads."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also worth noting is that just because a school has been "Renovated" doesn't mean it's in decent shape at all...

 

Especially in the first year of the occupation, whenever someone did visit one of those "renovated" schools, they found that the contractors hired to renovate them went in, replaced a few things, painted over the crumbling paint already there, charged the US a few million dollars and left...within a few months the paint crumbled back off and the school was in basically the same condition that it was before the contractors had visited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(winodj @ Aug 15, 2005 -> 04:23 PM)
If the U.S. was dealing with 70 bombings a day across the country, do you think we should be focusing our reporting on the opening of a new school?

You know, from now on whenever I hear someone throw out one of those "They're not covering the good things in Iraq" stories, I think I'm going to respond "Yeah, but they're not covering 65 out of the 70 attacks on U.S. forces per day either".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong - I don't want anyone to think that this is because of any specific bias on my behalf regarding our current position in Iraq. (It might surprise you actually.)

 

BUT I think that people should look at this with some perspective. The state of Iraq is attacked by insurgents an average of 70 times a day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 15, 2005 -> 06:55 PM)
You know, from now on whenever I hear someone throw out one of those "They're not covering the good things in Iraq" stories, I think I'm going to respond "Yeah, but they're not covering 65 out of the 70 attacks on U.S. forces per day either".

 

 

I agree with that post

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(YASNY @ Aug 16, 2005 -> 06:05 AM)
When our soldiers come home and complain about the press coverage they see being heavily slanted, then I'd say there must me a glimmer of truth in their claims. 

 

But, that's just me.

 

When White Sox fans look at the team's national coverage they see bias.

When GOPers see the news, they see bias

When Dems see the news, they see bias

 

Headline: Chicago 3,000,000 Drivers Arrived Safely To Work

Real Headline: 8 Car Accident Snarls Edens

 

If the press started ignoring the death toll and reporting "happy news" there would be outrage the other way that their sacrifice was going unnoticed.

 

The best definition of news is that it is a rough draft of history. Read most history books, building a school isn't included, wars and famine are. The dust bowl is history making, record crop production, is not.

 

Is the coverage what the GIs would want? Probably not. Would that channel have high rating? No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a triple suicide bombing in Baghdad today. Killed as many people as in London last month, but I guess that's not as important as "good news" then.

 

Here's the point dude, this stuff happens EVERY day. And if there were 70 bombings a day happening here, you think the Newton, PA little league team getting into the LL World Series would be a news story getting any attention at all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(winodj @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 07:29 AM)
There was a triple suicide bombing in Baghdad today. Killed as many people as in London last month, but I guess that's not as important as "good news" then.

 

Here's the point dude, this stuff happens EVERY day. And if there were 70 bombings a day happening here, you think the Newton, PA little league team getting into the LL World Series would be a news story getting any attention at all?

 

The irony is when Hussein was sending his death squads around to execute people for basically any reason, the media didn't think that was newsworthy, for some reason the deaths of Iraqis are now interesting. Millions of people are on the verge of starvation in Niger, if there is any reports about them, they are buried underneath Madonna falling off of her horse. If it is so important to report "bad" news, why are we not innudated with pictures from Niger every night? There are way more people dying there everyday, why if these kind of reports are so important, are these people forgotten, or at best marginalized?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(winodj @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 08:31 AM)
I'm not saying we shouldn't be reporting whats happening in Niger. But then again, how many good news stories do you hear from there either?

 

The point is about the type of coverage that we are receiving. That's all.

 

That's basically where I am going with this... If "good" news isn't newsworthy, why aren't we reporting REALLY bad news? If it is so important to report body counts, there are literally thousands of people a day starving, why aren't they at least as newsworthy as a couple hundred people in Iraq?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 06:37 AM)
That's basically where I am going with this... If "good" news isn't newsworthy, why aren't we reporting REALLY bad news?  If it is so important to report body counts, there are literally thousands of people a day starving, why aren't they at least as newsworthy as a couple hundred people in Iraq?

So along those same lines, why was the "Crisis" in Iraq worth 1850 American lives and $200 billion dollars over 2 years, when just the money alone could pay for clean drinking water for the rest of the world for decades, saving millions of lives per year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 12:30 PM)
So along those same lines, why was the "Crisis" in Iraq worth 1850 American lives and $200 billion dollars over 2 years, when just the money alone could pay for clean drinking water for the rest of the world for decades, saving millions of lives per year?

because all the terrorists are there, and there are WMD, or maybe because we could kick their ass quickly, land on an aircraft carrier declaring we WON!, and feel good about it.

 

"Hey honey, are you watching the news? How are things going in Iraq?"

"Great, we opened another school, gas lines were repaired, and some clean drinking water is working."

"Anybody die?"

"There you go being negative. Support the Troops and don't talk about anyone dying."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Texsox @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 02:25 PM)

because all the terrorists are there, and there are WMD,

or maybe because we could kick their ass quickly, land on an aircraft carrier declaring we WON!,  and feel good about it.

 

"Hey honey, are you watching the news? How are things going in Iraq?"

"Great, we opened another school, gas lines were repaired, and some clean drinking water is working."

"Anybody die?"

"There you go being negative. Support the Troops and don't talk about anyone dying."

 

"By the way, did you hear about all of the people who were slaughtered with that genocide in Sudan?"

 

"....."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 03:18 PM)
"By the way, did you hear about all of the people who were slaughtered with that genocide in Sudan?"

 

"....."

"Again, you are being negative. I hear some great real estate is opening up for some people. The homeless will have shelter and the funeral industry is going great. "

 

Remember some of the participants think they are getting a bum rap and doing good. They see media bias. And no, I am not comparing their actions to our troops. Not in any way, shape or form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 07:46 AM)
The irony is when Hussein was sending his death squads around to execute people for basically any reason, the media didn't think that was newsworthy, for some reason the deaths of Iraqis are now interesting.  Millions of people are on the verge of starvation in Niger, if there is any reports about them, they are buried underneath Madonna falling off of her horse. If it is so important to report "bad" news, why are we not innudated with pictures from Niger every night?  There are way more people dying there everyday, why if these kind of reports are so important, are these people forgotten, or at best marginalized?

 

 

 

I think it was last week, Anderson Cooper from CNN was in Niger doing 3 or 4 days worth of reporting. Of course..no one really watches his show

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ultimately it comes down to $$$. As it always does. Whether the news is good or bad amounts to whether it is selling. Idealists don't want to hear that but it's the truth. Why do contractors do a s***ty job remodeling schools in Iraq? Because they only care about the $$$.

 

Whether you want more "feel good" or "feel bad" stories the approach is the same. E-mail/write/phone the editors & tell them what you want & threaten to take your business elsewhere if they don't deliver.

 

It's the American way ;)

Edited by JUGGERNAUT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...