The Story Of The Century
On Monday, as news of news anchor Bob Woodward and cameraman Doug Vogt's injury in an IED explosion swept the media, I watched as Katie Couric became - I'm not exaggerating - all choked up at the story.
Two guys. And they lived.
I sat, dumbfounded. Here were a couple of guys who volunteered to go to Iraq - not even on orders, but to advance their careers - and were paid very well to do so (many times the salary of the soldiers and Marines around them). They were in the wrong place at the wrong time. And they lived to tell the tale.
And yet there Couric was, seeming to barely choke back tears. Today led each of their two hours with the Woodward/Vogt story.
I thought "how is this going to play among the troops?"
The answer: not especially well.
In Iraq, and throughout the military, there is sympathy and concern for anchor Bob Woodruff and cameraman Doug Vogt, but there is also this question:
"Why do you think this is such a huge story?" wrote an officer stationed in Baqubah, Iraq, Monday via e-mail. "It's a bit stunning to us over here how absolutely dominant the story is on every network and front page. I mean, you'd think we lost the entire 1st Marine Division or something.
"There's a lot of grumbling from guys at all ranks about it. That's a really impolite and impolitic thing to say ... but it's what you would hear over here."..."The point that is currently being made (is that) that press folks are more important than mere military folks," a senior military officer told UPI Tuesday...It's not quite as simple as that, of course. Military personnel often express frustration that the media harps on military casualty reports at the expense of what they consider their successes in Iraq.
However, as it promoted its story on Woodruff and Vogt Monday evening, the local ABC News affiliate in Washington showed a montage of exploding vehicles in Iraq -- footage culled largely from insurgents, who videotape the attacks and post them on Web sites to advertise or magnify their successes.
It doesn't get serious until one of their own gets hurt?
I've wondered that for a long time; in 1979, the media didn't get serious about covering the Sandinista Revolution until a journalist was killed by a Guardia Nacional soldier. Suddenly, it seemed, the media lost whatever perceived neutrality they'd had on the subject; Somoza was a baaad man, all of a sudden (which was true, although Somoza was small potatoes in the tyrant department).
Not that the media has much perspective as it is - but the Woodward incident can't help.
Posted by Mitch at
February 1, 2006 08:52 AM
| TrackBack
Even UPI noticed it:
From:
Some US troops question Woodruff coverage
By PAMELA HESS
UPI Pentagon Correspondent
(WASHINGTON, Jan. 31, 2006)
http://www.upi.com/SecurityTerrorism/view.php?StoryID=20060131-041958-8164r
excerpt:
Here is an incomplete list of American service members who were killed by hostile fire in Iraq that same week that Woodruff and Vogt were hit. The Pentagon does not release the names of the injured.
Spc. Brian J. Schoff, 22, of Manchester, Tenn., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Jan. 28, when an improvised explosive device detonated near his HMMWV.
Sgt. David L. Herrera, 26, of Oceanside, Calif., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Jan. 28, when an improvised explosive device detonated near his HMMWV during combat operations.
Lance Cpl. Billy D. Brixey Jr., 21, of Ferriday, La., died Jan. 27 at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Germany, from wounds received as a result of an improvised explosive device while traveling in a convoy in Afghanistan on Jan. 25.
Lance Cpl. Hugo R. Lopez, 20, of La Habra, Calif., died Jan. 27 at Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, from wounds sustained from an improvised explosive device while conducting combat operations against enemy forces in Rawah, Iraq, on Nov. 20, 2005.
Staff Sgt. Jerry M. Durbin Jr., 26, of Spring, Texas, died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Jan. 25, when an improvised explosive device exploded near his dismounted patrol during combat operations.
Sgt. Joshua A. Johnson, 24, of Richford, Vt., died in Ramadi, Iraq, on Jan. 25, when a rocket propelled grenade struck his vehicle during combat operations.
Staff Sgt. Lance M. Chase, 32, of Oklahoma City, Okla., and Pfc. Peter D. Wagler, 18, of Partridge, Kan., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Jan. 23, of wounds sustained that day when an improvised explosive device detonated near their M1A2 Abrams tank during patrol operations.
Sgt. Sean H. Miles, 28, of Midlothian, Va., was killed in action Jan. 24 from small arms fire while conducting combat operations against enemy forces in Al Karmah, Iraq.
Sgt. Matthew D. Hunter, 31, of Valley Grove, W.Va., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Jan. 23, when an improvised explosive device detonated near his dismounted patrol during combat operations.
Sgt. Sean H. Miles, 28, of Midlothian, Va., was killed in action Jan. 24 from small arms fire while conducting combat operations against enemy forces in Al Karmah, Iraq.
Tech. Sgt. Jason L. Norton, 32, of Miami, Okla. and Staff Sgt. Brian McElroy, 28, of San Antonio, Texas, were killed Jan. 22, when their vehicle struck an improvised explosive device while conducting convoy escort duties in the vicinity of Taji, Iraq.
Posted by: RBMN at February 1, 2006 09:01 AMI believe that this is another indication of the increasing lack of professionalism among the MSM. Someone they know got hurt, and it's all they're talking about around the water cooler; and because they are consumed by it, they assume that the rest of us are as well.
They don't have the perspective necessary to realize that this is one story among a thousand.
Of course, once they had the special graphic made up and the music composed, and planned their programming to include 84% coverage, it's hard for the cable networks to back off a story, especially one that 1) involves one of their own special people; and 2) underscores the horrid "reality" they are trying to reinforce.
Posted by: Pious Agnostic at February 1, 2006 09:30 AMCould you wingnuts please get straight whether the evil "mainstream media" is over-emphasizing or under-emphasizing combat casualties in Iraq? Cause you can't have it both ways.
Dumb, obvious post.
Posted by: angryclown at February 1, 2006 10:40 AMNeed to edit your post. You've got some Woodward/Woodruff confusion happening.
Same thing happened to me when I first heard the story: "That Watergate guy? Isn't he a little old to be chasing Deep Throat in Tikrit?"
Posted by: Ernst Stavro Blofeld at February 1, 2006 11:13 AMClown,
"Could you wingnuts please get straight whether the evil "mainstream media" is over-emphasizing or under-emphasizing combat casualties in Iraq? Cause you can't have it both ways."
We don't, and it's irrelevant; it's a given that the MSM overemphasizes bad news in general. The point is that you'd think Woodruff's (non life-threatening) injuries were the most important story of the war.
Dumb, obtuse comment.
E-Blo,
Doh!
Posted by: mitch at February 1, 2006 11:21 AMHey, A-Clo,
How'd the party go? It was last weekend, right?
Dish the dirt!
Posted by: meeyotch at February 1, 2006 11:22 AMThe gathering is this coming weekend. A certain sassy Texan will be in attendance, if that makes any difference.
Posted by: angryclown at February 1, 2006 11:41 AMDozens of journalists have been killed, wounded or abducted covering the war in Iraq. Most of them, like Jill Carroll (a freelancer who can be seen begging for her life on al Jazeera) make very little money. When the guy who gets blown up is a network TV anchor, does he get disproportionate coverage from his network TV colleagues? Sure.
Similarly, a couple of months ago you posted about Ron Schulz, a guy from your hometown who was kidnapped and murdered in Iraq. But I don't recall anyone here mentioning that the guy was over there to work - not in the military. Or wondering why we should care about the death of some guy we'd never heard of. People uniformly condemned the murder and sympathized with his friends and family.
So maybe you can wait until Woodruff is conscious before plugging him into another of your boilerplate anti-press rants. I expect more class from this blog. Rethink.
Posted by: angryclown at February 1, 2006 12:18 PMJunior press critic Brad supposed: "The MSM over-emphasizes casualties but under-emphasizes the sorrow in a solider lost."
Here's a link to 102 military obits aired by that notorious right-wing news source National Public Radio.
http://www.npr.org/search.php?text=iraqobit
You don't like the coverage? How about one of those market solutions you wingnuts profess to favor: don't watch.
Posted by: angryclown at February 1, 2006 12:28 PMI was going to cue Peeby Mikey to start babbling, but apparently my favorite sign of second-stage syphillis jumped in to do it for him.
Posted by: Badda-Blogger at February 1, 2006 01:19 PM;)
The problem may be too much free time, Brad. You're like one of those old bats who spend four hours a day listening to Howard Stern, counting the number of times he says "p*nis" and writing letters to the FCC.
Posted by: angryclown at February 1, 2006 03:05 PMI think this story gives a very good insight into how media bias works. I posted a brief posting about that. They (the media) are so out of touch with the rest of the world that they sincerely believe what is news to them is also news to the rest of us.
Complicating the issue is their broken theory that they need to become a part of the stories instead of being observers. Then they become too attached to the stories and their perspective becomes further warped.
Posted by: Tony at February 1, 2006 04:42 PMFrom my extended family, I also remember the WWII-era story of a nameless soldier who probably saved half a dozen American lives next to a cave, thought to be long-abandoned by the Japanese Army. They (the Americans) were looking for some souvenirs to bring home. This American soldier burned his hand by touching a teapot (not for souvenir purposes) near the entrance of that cave, and they got the hell out of there--fast. For all I know, that guy that touched the hot teapot got killed a week later, or a month later, but because of him, half a dozen guys probably missed getting blown up together in a cave by a Japanese grenade or two, somewhere in the South Pacific.
Posted by: RBMN at February 1, 2006 05:25 PMOther things Brad has ZERO curiosity about:
1. the magical force that makes things fall when you drop them;
2. the cause of the burning sensation when he urinates;
3. what's all this fuss about cousins getting married and having kids together.
Posted by: angryclown at February 1, 2006 05:34 PMRBNB, teapots are supposed to be hot. It sounds like the nameless soldier saved his buddies from enjoying some tea.
Posted by: angryclown at February 1, 2006 05:38 PM"what's all this fuss about cousins getting married and having kids together."
Uh, well I use to live next door to a kid whose parents were first cousins. The kid seems normal, but I guess that's a relative term.
Nice chatting with you, AC.
Posted by: Brad at February 1, 2006 06:06 PMSpeaking of burning urination, how's the camel been AC? Did you get that pesky permit situation resolved? I hear those Brokeback Mountain producers are looking for a new story...
Posted by: Kermit at February 1, 2006 06:36 PMSo if I understand this correctly, the media over-emphasizes the deaths of service men and women but they don't do a good enough job of emphasizing the sorrow and anguish of losing the soldiers...
Is that about right?
Posted by: Doug at February 1, 2006 07:12 PMCorrect, Doug. Honor the soldiers' memories without mentioning that they, you know, DIED. Goes hand in hand with the GOP's war plans: engage in a long-term worldwide military action without any civilian homefront sacrifice while pushing through huge tax cuts.
Posted by: Tim at February 1, 2006 08:27 PMRe: Tim at February 1, 2006 08:27 PM
Taxes down. Economy recovers. Total tax revenue goes up. Funny how that happens. Total revenue up actually helps in wartime or helps reduce the deficit, and is not accomplished by "soaking the rich." If the task is to bring in more revenue, then soaking the rich has just the opposite effect. Is your personal goal to produce more tax revenue, or just punish people with high incomes?
Posted by: RBMN at February 1, 2006 09:27 PMRBMN said,
"Taxes down. Economy recovers."
That's pretty funny considering that Reagan didn't see a growth in the economy till after he was forced to rollback much of his 1981 cuts.
As a matter of fact, the modern administration that saw the fastest economic growth was Bill Clintons.
Posted by: Doug at February 6, 2006 09:56 PM"That's pretty funny considering that Reagan didn't see a growth in the economy till after he was forced to rollback much of his 1981 cuts."
Fiction. The "Rollback" covered a tiny fraction of his '81 cuts. It was a tinker, not an overhaul. Ascribing the recovery to the "rollback" has been a standard bit of lefty spin for twenty-odd years - but the numbers don't bear it out.
"As a matter of fact, the modern administration that saw the fastest economic growth was Bill Clintons"
Largely as a result of a huge infusion of cash from the rollback of defense spending caused by *what* major realignment of priorties?
Caused by *what* president?
I don't wanna keep seeing the same hands, here.
Posted by: mitch at February 7, 2006 01:13 AM