Gee despite all the unwaivering support from most of the conservatively controlled media outlets, Bush still is whining about the media coverage on Iraq. I know he doesn’t read newspapers, so how would he know? Maybe somebody could turn his TV to Fox News Channel so he could see how stupid he sounds:
Gee maybe its because the facts disprove your foolish spin control. That’s not a “filter”, its reality. Here is a hint- just because you repeat it over and over, doesn’t mean its true. Any 5 year old has learned that by now.
Things are getting better huh?
84 attacks? People, including American troops are dying every day and that’s “better”? No end in sight for our occupying troops, many of them Reservists and National Guard troops who don’t have their daddy’s connections to get them out of the war or even bothering to serve out the rest of their Guard obligation.
Well, things must be going better on the UN front, right? Nope.
While Mr. Positive is sure we will find those pesky WMDs and that things are going great in Iraq, it’s the media’s fault for telling the painful truth, oops I mean “filtering” the facts. Funny, the same guy then claims he doesn’t know if we will ever find out who in his Administration violated federal law to smear the wife of an Administration foe. Gee I wonder why [cough cough] coverup [cough cough].
I think there is indeed a media filter on the coverage of Iraq but it may not quite be what Bush has in mind. I think what is driving the media now is what always drives the media. How exciting does this look on TV? Fiery smoked ruins always look better than a picture of an Iraqi bank with a voice over on economic reform. We see very little reporting done on the rebuilding of Iraq -be it good news or bad. Is the electricity still problematic in Bagdad? How’s the drinking water now? What’s the unemployment level? How many Iraqis are back to work and drawing pay?
Cmon, the Prez learned a NEW WORD, and he’s checking it out to see where it fits in the national discourse. There’s no need to get all REVISIONIST over his ass for it. It shows that he’s at least trying to enlarge his vocabulary, and put those years of self-cultivated vocabularistic-ignorance behind him. He should be applauded for his efforts at self-improvement.
Smooth! Almost as good a plan as illegally leaking Cia spy’s indentities to somehow smear her spouse. I guess it’s that pesky “Step 2” that I still can’t figure out (with a tip o’ the cap to South Park).
I’ve found it funny that not one news story has been aired concerning the burial of the returning dead, ‘a community mourns’ kind of thing. Meanwhile, on the other side of the pond, Blair and her Maj attended a memorial servce for the war dead: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3179442.stm
Of course the media places emphasis on deadly attacks on American soldiers. I’ve seen plenty of other reconstruction reports as well though.
I don’t know. While I think the “filter” the “media” has been applying to the news coming out of Iraq is exactly the same “filter” “they” have always applied(whatever will sell), it is indeed painting the occupation in a bad light. I saw a Frontline report(video available online from this link, a transcript should be up in a few days) which contained the following sequence. Troops were ordered to stop looters. A tank patrol was on the streets of Bhagdad and pulled over a vehicle with a small amount of wood(a dozen 2X4’s tops) strapped to the roof. The troops were attempting to speak to the people from inside the car, but the language barrier was seemingly insurmountable. No translator was with the patrol. The troops concluded that the vehicle was carrying looted wood, so they made the group get out and stand away from the vehicle. They fired their rifles and sidearms into the vehicle and then ran over it twice with their tank. They destroyed both the wood and the vehicle in the middle of the street.
The news crew, who apparently had a translator available to them, tracked down the Iraqi’s who owned the vehicle and spoke to them. The owner of the vehicle said he was a taxi driver and the vehicle had been his family’s source of income. As far as I can tell the charge of carrying looted goods was not contested.
I’m not a big fan of cowboy justice, and if these events are indeed common in occupied Iraq, then something needs to be done about it and damn fast. However, if this was an isolated incident, then it was misleading to play it up as sensationally as the program did. It was a very powerful segment and it really did get both myself and my wife pretty hot under the collar. To have someone dispensing this kind of justice when they can’t even speak the language and the “criminals” have both no chance to defend themselves and no recourse just really makes my blood boil. Like I said, if this is common, I want to see heads roll. If it is not common, then I want to see heads roll. I do not condone sensationalizing rare events and selling them to the public without clear disclaimers of the rarity of such events. There was no disclaimer on the event described above in the program. I think there should have been and now I’m all annoyed.
While I still believe the sensationalism(and the accompanying increased viewership/sales) is what the “media” is mostly after, I think some responsibility should be expected as well.
I have used quotation marks around terms like “media” in this post because there is no real unified media viewpoint in the US. Each station and news organization makes their own calls. Even from something like an AP wire, or a Reuters feed, there are enough correspondents writing in various ways, or editorial freedom on the part of the broadcaster to re-write or combine stories if they feel the balance is not fair. There is no monolithic, or even consensus-driven, “media” viewpoint.
I saw the same sequence, Mtgman. Appalling. For a pile of wood? Fucking wood! I don’t really care if it was looted or not, its just wood, fer chrissake! As LoonieLefty as I may (proudly) be, if I hadn’t seen it with my own eyes, I would never have believed it.
Thanks for the link. I will have to wait until I am home to watch it though. I love Frontline. There multi part piece on the first gulf war was excellent. Worth it alone just for the Collin Powell interview.
Quite frankly I think I was annoyed by the senseless firing of the weapons into the vehicle. I mean, they had already decided to destroy it by running over it with the tank. If that is indeed the punishment deemed for looting(and seizure of property used to facilitate illegal acts is a long-established rule in the US) then confiscating the vehicle is within the rights of the occupation government. Destruction of the vehicle is within the rights of the occupying forces as well. But to fire the bullets into it? And THEN run over it with the tank? What kind of cowboyism was this? What possible purpose did it serve to have bullets flying? The destruction of the vehicle was accomplished by running over it with the tank.
I don’t understand. If this is the kind of justice and rule of law the occupation has brought to Iraq then we’ve got to make some changes and damn quick. I hate to say it, but I think we need to ship some lawyers over to Iraq. I’ve got a few ambulance-chasers in my town that I can nominate. At least one of them even has experience with tanks.(this is an obscure nod to a friend of mine) Even operating under Martial Law people shouldn’t be allowed to get away with crap like that.
Oh, for anyone who wants to see the incident I mentioned above. Please check out the segmented downloads page for the show. There are seven segments for the 90 minute program. The sequence I am referring to is approximately seven minutes into the first segment, the Prologue. Upon review I see it was a bit more wood than I had remembered from my first viewing. There appear to be a few half-sheets of plywood and about a half-dozen 2X4s. It also seems guilt was more certain than I recalled. The program said the troops “caught a group of Iraqi’s stealing wood”.
Still seems very much outside the idea of proportionate justice, even under Martial Law.
I wonder how soon before Shrub is going to announce that it is no longer in the national interest [meaning his re-election campaign] to report the deaths of American soldiers in Iraq. Or at least in a timely fashion.
Regarding the OP: For years, I’ve heard conservative pundits allege that the media is liberal biased. Is this the first whiff of the administration adopting that same position?
The AP calls Bush annoyed by the media “filter”. Bush has said he doesn’t watch or read much media, and that he counts on his advisors for news. So, how can he be annoyed by something he doesn’t pay attention to? Or is it just that his advisors are annoyed?
To continue the Frontline hijack: I was similarly stunned by the tank crushing segment. I told an ex-Army buddy of mine about it. He was immediately and temporarily pissed at me for “blaming the troops”. I really want to think that those soldiers had no instructions or bad instructions for dealing with looters. I think it’s important to blame shitty planning instead of the men. It’s not the soldiers’ fault - it’s the fault of the guy who sent the fucking army in a fucking tank to catch some guys stealing wood. After all, I must admit, if I were 18, and I were stationed in Iraq, I’d think it’d be pretty cool to crush a car with my tank.
