The Media's Anti-War Bias

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by Adam's Apple, Dec 22, 2004.

  1. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    By Joseph Perkins, San Diego Union-Tribune
    December 17, 2004

    A new Gallup survey is rather disquieting for those of us in the media. It finds that not even a quarter of Americans perceive either television or newspaper reporters to have "very high" or "high" standards of ethics and honesty.

    There are various explanations for that perception in the eyes of the public. But the belief here is that one major contributing factor is the public's perception that some of what they read on the front pages of the major dailies or watch on the evening news is politically slanted.

    Indeed, the public need look no further than coverage of the war in Iraq to see prima facie evidence of media bias. Take the recent incident involving Edward Lee Pitts, a reporter with the Chattanooga Times Free Press. Pitts sat in on a town-hall style meeting in Kuwait between Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and soldiers awaiting deployment to Iraq.

    Rather than simply report the give and take between Rummy and the troops, Pitts got himself into the act. He surreptitiously fed one soldier a "gotcha" question about vehicle armor, that the soldier almost certainly would not have asked on his own, that the reporter knew would put the defense secretary on the spot.

    Then, as Pitts later boasted in an e-mail, he "went and found the Sgt. in charge of microphone for the question and answer session and made sure he knew to get my guys out the crowd."

    What was really groovy, Pitts continued, "was that after the event was over the throng of national media following Rumsfeld – The New York Times, AP, all the major networks – swarmed to the two soldiers I brought from the unit I am embedded with."

    Then there's Kevin Sites, the NBC News correspondent, who was embedded with the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment. During last month's military campaign to retake Fallujah from the insurgents, Sites filmed the shooting of an apparently injured enemy fighter by a Marine. The footage was broadcast not only here in the United States, but throughout the world. It further inflamed anti-American sentiments in the Arab street, not to mention among Iraq's Sunni minority.

    Sites denies being an anti-war activist. He professes to be "shocked to see myself painted" that way. Yet, his previous work, featuring photos of captured Iraqis, appears on a Web site entitled "Images Against War." Surely, the anti-war site did not use the lensman's work without his assent.

    Finally, there's the Abu Ghraib story. It made worldwide news after a sensational report last spring on "60 Minutes II," featuring CBS news "correspondent" Dan Rather, exposing abuse of Iraqi prisoners at the hands of American soldiers. Now CBS producers have never seen fit to broadcast footage of the various men (and at least one woman) who have been beheaded by insurgents (or terrorists) in Iraq. Yet, they chose to air highly inflammatory photographs showing American soldiers mistreating captured Iraqis.

    It would be one thing if CBS had been exposing a cover-up by the Pentagon. But the fact is that, a month before the "60 Minutes II" report aired, the Army announced that 17 soldiers in Iraq, including a brigadier general, had been removed from duty for degrading Iraqi prisoners. As it happens, the Abu Ghraib prison photos that aired on "60 Minutes II" were obtained by CBS News producer Mary Mapes. She's the same producer who obtained the phony documents suggesting that President Bush did not fulfill his Vietnam-era National Guard obligations. Of course, Mapes and her colleagues at CBS News would deny being anti-Bush, would deny being anti-war.

    Questions about armor plating for the Humvees used in Iraq needed asking. The story about the Marine shooting an apparently injured, apparently unarmed insurgent fighter needed telling. And scandalous treatment of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib needed exposure.

    But as Marshall McLuhan, the so-called Oracle of the Electronic Age, famously said: "The medium is the massage."

    Indeed, when stories appear on the front pages of major dailies or air on the evening news offering decidedly negative assessments of America's prosecution of the war in Iraq or reflecting badly upon this nation's men and women in uniform, many Americans wonder about the reporter's motivation.

    In many cases, if not most, the reporter may simply be calling it as he or she sees it. But in at least some cases, it seems, the reporter's story is driven by anti-war bias.
     
  2. NATO AIR
    Offline

    NATO AIR Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,275
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USS Abraham Lincoln
    Ratings:
    +282
    i still don't hear jack shit about heroic or even "good" actions and sacrifices american troops make over there... it sickens me to realize there are fellows like the marine that ollie north wrote about recently that are getting no fucking attention at all in the MSM...
     
  3. Bonnie
    Offline

    Bonnie Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,476
    Thanks Received:
    668
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Wherever
    Ratings:
    +669
    Ill take heart in the fact that this is now all coming out thanks in part to other conservative media outlets that give another point of view aside from America sucks, Bush is evil and stupid, Rummy is evil and innept, all corporations are evil, figthing to protect your country is wrong unless you do it endlessly through UN luncheons, public expression of religion is wrong, mainly for Christians, Christians are just plain wrong about everything and should just sit down and shut up, abortion is okay, all abortion is okay, America needs to feel the terrorists pain, and understand where they are coming from, Hussein was only a minor nuisance, democracy is not worth fighting for, especially in countries that are too stupid to really GET IT, Socialism is great and right...........................

    It's nice to have a rebuttal to that now.......
     
  4. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    Hallelujah! Did you ever think the back of the liberal press would be broken in America? I would never have believed it possible in my lifetime. Miracles still do occur!
     
  5. hylandrdet
    Offline

    hylandrdet Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    548
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Ratings:
    +49
    For one thing Bush isn't evil, he's stupid; that's the result of ignorance of which cannot be defined as neither good of evil.

    say for example the recent bombing that claimed 22 lives.
    From my training, I'd learned that a terrorists know four things

    1. You'll have to sleep
    2. You'll have to eat
    3. You'll have to sh#t
    4. If possible, you'll have to party

    So long as they know those things, they will have more than enough opportunities to strike us, anytime, anywhere. There is no known technology that can combat such elements.

    Hopefully this attack had blown your head out of your a@s so as you can understand that we're in over our heads.

    We Christians are NOT wrong in what we stand for...

    We are wrong when we attempt to implement it into federal legislation, which violates the separation of church and state; and we are definitely WRONG when we attempt to shove it down the throats of people who don't want it and are willing to fight and die to resist it.

    Hussein was a nuisance, check YOUR CIA REPORT. NO WMD's. Excuse this horse for being drawn to the water and refuse to drink.

    This second administration is on the verge of collaspe before it gets sworn in and you know it. I posted to every democratic web site to just simply let go of the "Tug-of-war-rope" and let the Republicans fall ON THEIR A@#ES.

    So far, so very so good!
     
  6. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403

    Getting whupped by "stupid people" must really burn your ass----oh wait--it was part of the plan to let the republicans implode ! Dream on! :finger3:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. manu1959
    Offline

    manu1959 Left Coast Isolationist

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Messages:
    13,761
    Thanks Received:
    1,625
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    california
    Ratings:
    +1,626
    yea the germans and french are planning a comback as well..... combined they are 0 and 4
     
  8. theim
    Offline

    theim Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,628
    Thanks Received:
    234
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Ratings:
    +234
    How old are you hylandrt? Old enough to try and relive the glory days of Vietnam perhaps? Or just a hippie wannabee who sees 22 dead in an attack and goes "Woe is us! We're in over our heads!" SUCK IT UP. The thing OBL was planning on is that Americans don't have the guts to stomach alot of casualties. To see morons like you attempt to prove him right sickens me.

    And many...what are you talking about? The Germans won WWII. We are all just jacked into their "Matrix" while the electricity from our comatose bodies goes to power their robot armies.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page