Big Story In Iraq Last Week Was What?

[Annie]

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ed.../the_good_news_from_iraq_is_not_fit_to_print/

The good news from Iraq is not fit to print

By Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist | November 2, 2005

WHAT WAS the most important news out of Iraq last week?

That depends on what you consider ''important." Do you see the war against radical Islam and Ba'athist fascism as the most urgent conflict of our time? Do you believe that replacing tyranny with democratic self-government is ultimately the only antidote to the poison that has made the Middle East so dangerous and violent? If so, you'll have no trouble identifying the most significant development in Iraq last week: the landslide victory of the new Iraqi Constitution.

The announcement on Oct. 25 that the first genuinely democratic national charter in Arab history had been approved by 79 percent of Iraqis was a major piece of good news. It confirmed the courage of Iraq's people and their hunger for freedom and decent governance. It advanced the US campaign to democratize a country that for 25 years had been misruled by a mass-murdering sociopath. It underscored the decision by Iraq's Sunnis, who had boycotted the parliamentary elections in January, to pursue their goals through ballots, not bullets. And it dealt a humiliating blow to the bombers and beheaders -- to the likes of Islamist butcher Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who earlier this year declared ''a fierce war on this evil principle of democracy" and threatened to kill anyone who took part in the elections.

No question: If you think that defeating Islamofascism, extending liberty, and transforming the Middle East are important, it's safe to say you saw the ratification of the new constitution as the Iraqi news story of the week.

But that isn't how the mainstream media saw it.

Consider The Washington Post. On the morning after the results of the Iraqi referendum were announced, the Post's front page was dominated by a photograph, stretched across four columns, of three daughters at the funeral of their father, Lieutenant Colonel Leon James II, who had died from injuries suffered during a Sept. 26 bombing in Baghdad. Two accompanying stories, both above the fold, were headlined ''Military Has Lost 2,000 in Iraq" and ''Bigger, Stronger, Homemade Bombs Now to Blame for Half of US Deaths." A nearby graphic -- ''The Toll" -- divided the 2,000 deaths by type of military service -- active duty, National Guard, and Reserves.

From Page 1, the stories jumped to a two-page spread inside, where they were illustrated with more photographs, a series of drawings depicting roadside attacks, and a large US map showing where each fallen soldier was from. On a third inside page, meanwhile, another story was headlined ''2,000th Death Marked by Silence and a Vow." It began: ''Washington marked the 2,000th American fatality of the Iraq war with a moment of silence in the Senate, the reading of the names of the fallen from the House floor, new protests, and a solemn vow from President Bush not to 'rest or tire until the war on terror is won.' " Two photos appeared alongside, one of Bush and another of antiwar protester Cindy Sheehan. And to give the body count a local focus, there was yet another story (''War's Toll Leaves Baltimore in Mourning") plus four pictures of troops killed in Iraq.

The Post didn't ignore the Iraqi election results. A story appeared on Page A13 (''Sunnis Failed to Defeat Iraq Constitution"), along with a map breaking down the vote by province. But like other leading newspapers, including The New York Times, The Boston Globe, and the Los Angeles Times, it devoted vastly more attention to the 2,000-death ''milestone," a statistic with no unique significance apart from the fact that it ends in round numbers.

Every death in Iraq is heartbreaking. The 2,000th fatality was neither more nor less meaningful than the 1,999 that preceded it. But if anything makes the death toll remarkable, it is how historically low it is. Considering what the war has accomplished so far -- the destruction of the region's bloodiest dictatorship, the liberation of 25 million Iraqis, the emergence of democratic politics, the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon, the abandonment by Libya of its nuclear weapons program -- it is hard to disagree with Norman Podhoretz, who notes in the current Commentary that these achievements have been ''purchased at an astonishingly low cost in American blood when measured by the standards of every other war we have ever fought."

But that isn't a message Big Media cares to emphasize. Hostile to the war and to the administration conducting it, the nation's leading news outlets harp on the negative and pessimistic, consistently underplaying all that is going right in Iraq. Their fixation on the number of troops who have died outweighs their interest in the cause for which those fallen heroes fought -- a cause that advanced with the ratification of the new constitution.

Poll after poll confirms the public's low level of confidence in mainstream media news. Gallup recently measured that confidence at 28 percent, an all-time low. Why such mistrust? The media's slanted coverage of Iraq provides a pretty good clue.

 

[insein]

They'll continue to brainwash those that still wish to be brainwashed but those with half a brain will begin to see through their agenda and the Media will have forgotten THEIR main purpose. Making money. IF it bleeds it leads doesnt follow anymore. If its true then people will buy it. The internet, talk radio, etc is killing the newspapers in grabbing an audience. Alittle more financial loss and they might start to realize that maybe the truth is the hot thing to sell now and not their version of the truth.

 

[menewa]

This columnist looked at one newspaper and made a generalization to the entire mainstream media. That's poor analysis.

Did anybody here listen to NPR last week? Everyday they devoted lead time on all their general news programs to the Iraqi Constitution. NPR enjoys more listeners than the Post does readers. Simply looking at one other source blows a hole in this guys argument.

 

[Annie]

This columnist looked at one newspaper and made a generalization to the entire mainstream media. That's poor analysis.

Did anybody here listen to NPR last week? Everyday they devoted lead time on all their general news programs to the Iraqi Constitution. NPR enjoys more listeners than the Post does readers. Simply looking at one other source blows a hole in this guys argument.

Nope, you are the one going on one source. Check out the major dailies and MSM coverage-that is what he is writing about.

 

[menewa]

Nope, you are the one going on one source. Check out the major dailies and MSM coverage-that is what he is writing about.

The only example used in the article is the Washington Post. Did you even read the column?

 

[Annie]

The only example used in the article is the Washington Post. Did you even read the column?

Yes, did you?

 

[Annie]

Yes, did you?

:scratch:

The Post didn't ignore the Iraqi election results. A story appeared on Page A13 (''Sunnis Failed to Defeat Iraq Constitution"), along with a map breaking down the vote by province. But like other leading newspapers, including The New York Times, The Boston Globe, and the Los Angeles Times, it devoted vastly more attention to the 2,000-death ''milestone," a statistic with no unique significance apart from the fact that it ends in round numbers.

 

[menewa]

I love how you argue through emoticons. It's all the rage among middle schoolers.

 

[Annie]

I love how you argue through emoticons. It's all the rage among middle schoolers.

Sorry, you just cannot read and you are NOT a middle schooler. Yet you are quite quick to try to be witty. :coffee3:

 

[Bonnie]

This columnist looked at one newspaper and made a generalization to the entire mainstream media. That's poor analysis.

Did anybody here listen to NPR last week? Everyday they devoted lead time on all their general news programs to the Iraqi Constitution. NPR enjoys more listeners than the Post does readers. Simply looking at one other source blows a hole in this guys argument.

Nets Barely Touch Iraqi Constitution,
Recall Bush's "Combat Over"

An overwhelming 79 percent of Iraqis, who risked their lives just over a week ago to cast their ballot, voted in favor of the nation's new constitution, but you'd have missed it if you sneezed during Tuesday's CBS Evening News or ABC's World News Tonight. CBS anchor Bob Schieffer delivered only this single sentence -- "Iraq's government announced today that voters did approve the country's new constitution in this month's referendum" -- before moving on to a full story about the 2,000th death of U.S. servicemen in Iraq, a piece he could not resist introducing without adding this snide aside: "More than 90 percent of the 2,000 who died in the war have died since the President declared major combat was at an end in May 2003."

On ABC, which had time for a full piece from Terry Moran about the "potentially huge" story of Vice President Cheney's supposed role in the Plame case, anchor Elizabeth Vargas briefly noted how "in Iraq today, there was a milestone on the road to democracy: The official results show that a new constitution was ratified by an overwhelming margin." That was it for the Iraqi constitution. ABC led with, as Vargas put it, the "terrible milestone" of 2,000 killed in Iraq. Viewers then saw two stories: Martha Raddatz on the anguish of Army medical personnel and Barbara Pinto on parents in an Ohio town who have lost sons in Iraq.

The NBC Nightly News devoted a full story to the 2,000 "milestone" followed by a piece from Iraq which began with the overwhelming approval of the constitution by 79 percent, what reporter Richard Engel called "a historic milestone" before he moved on to the ongoing violence and how "there are some bright spots," such as more jobs.

[This item was posted Tuesday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org. To share your comments, go to: newsbusters.org ]

Bob Schieffer introduced October 25 CBS Evening News coverage, as provided by the MRC's Brad Wilmouth:
"Iraq's government announced today that voters did approve the country's new constitution in this month's referendum. The sad marker that we all dreaded, but knew was coming, came today. The deaths of three more American service members brought the total U.S. dead in the war to 2,000. President Bush talked about the deaths during a speech to military wives."
George W. Bush, in speech: "A time of war is a time for sacrifice, and the greatest burden falls on our military families. We've lost some of our nation's finest men and women in the war on terror. Each of these men and women left grieving families and left loved ones back home."
Schieffer: "More than 90 percent of the 2,000 who died in the war have died since the President declared major combat was at an end in May 2003, which brings us to our next report. Usually we salute fallen heroes during this part of our broadcast, but tonight, we're going to look at the impact a military death can have on not just a family, but an entire community. Here is national security correspondent David Martin."

Martin delivered a piece about the impact of deaths on small towns, particularly one on Georgia.

http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2005/cyb20051026.asp#1

 

[Annie]

Nets Barely Touch Iraqi Constitution,
Recall Bush's "Combat Over"



http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2005/cyb20051026.asp#1

Good find Bonnie. Menewa is quite upset with my use of smilies!

 

[Bonnie]

Good find Bonnie. Menewa is quite upset with my use of smilies!

There's quite a bit more out there as well....

 

[Said1]

Aww, I see Minew has left the building before he could admit he was wrong. Drat, next time I guess.