Kevin,

We understand where you are coming from but you missed our point. Civil debate is great; except you do not seem to want to get what we are saying. In a debate, you must also listen and evaluate what your opponent is saying.

Without question, it is important, respectful and proper to report the deaths and the circumstances. We NEVER asked you not to report them nor have we asked you to drop them from the front page or put them at the bottom of the broadcast. Where did you get the false impression of what we are asking for from reporters? We ask you to report the ENTIRE picture. The good, the bad and the ugly! It is that simple.

Despite what some in the media think American soldiers dying is NOT the only thing happening over there! How does reporting the deaths rank as the only story that effectively provides information showing the challenges faced by our soldiers in their effort or the only way to hold government or military leaders accountable for the choices that are being made on our behalf? If you really believe this is the only effective way to obtain that goal then no one can help you understand what we ask of you. That view is such a myopic position that it is chilling as well a disservice to the entire country. To turn one of your arguments around, if you had a loved one stationed over there won’t you be pretty upset that only the bad news is being reported? What about the good things our soldiers are doing for the Iraqi people. Shouldn’t a wife, a child, a mother and father be given the information to be proud of what their loved one is accomplishing to help the Iraqi people and fighting the War on Terror? Don’t those things matter too?

You raise the question of the transparency of the motives of the Iraqis, the military, the CPA but fail to mention the news media also seems to have a problem with the transparency of their motives for only reporting a portion of what is actually happening over there. We, the American public do not have an omniscient view! The press is supposed to be our eyes and ears! You have become partially blind and deaf! Is it the media’s agenda getting in the way?

It is absurd to state that in the entire country on a day-to-day basis a death or a fledgling democratic governing council meeting in Kirkuk is the sole happening worth reporting! How much longer would it take to add a line or paragraph stating another school opened or another so many watts were added to the power grid, oil production is up so many barrels or a group of soldiers visit an orphanage or organized a soccer game. You have all the space you want on your blog; the newscasters could add a sentence or two with film included, the newspapers can add a story and picture on the front page! It is ridiculous to pretend there is not enough time or space for items of this nature! It is also outrageous to deny the importance of items of this nature!

Stay Safe!

Hello again What made you go back again? For you was it sort of like gettng back on the horse after the ordeal you had going through Sadams hometown. How long is your coverage there gonna go for. Theres a great deal of work yet to do there in Iraq.I was hoping it was done with but apparently not. take care and be safe Glad to hear you checked it on this sit if that was you on the last msg. bye bye for now

Edited by author 10-15-2003 05:32 AM
Hey guys, good debate about media coverage in Iraq. Some of you Rob, CGeib, Kate -- believe we focus too much on casualties here. I'm curious what you would have us do
when American soldiers are killed and injured? Not report it? Drop it from the front page or to the bottom of the broadcast? If I had a loved one here and they were killed serving their country and that sacrifice only managed a page 15 mention or came after a story about a military toy drive I'd be pretty upset. A soldier who makes the ultimate sacrifice of his or her life here deserves the proper respect of factual and honest reporting concerning the circumstance of their death. This fuels civil debate (like what we're doing here), provides you with information on the challenges faced in this effort and give you a way to keep government and military leaders accountable for the life and death choices that are being made on your behalf.

The motives of most here, the Iraqis, the military the Coalition Provisional Authority, are rarely if every immediately transparent. It takes work to understand what is happening. We in the media don't have an omniscient view. We are making mistakes here--but I assure you, in Iraq we're not alone in that venture. We look, we see, we hear, we report. We hope that eventually these observations will provide a somewhat coherent picture. Somedays deaths dominate the news--because that's what happened here. Sometimes the success of a fledgling democratic governing council in Kirkuk is highlighed because that's what happened.

Edited by author 10-14-2003 11:32 PM
Ordi, I too agree a soldier is worth more than a tree.

But where are these trees? From what I've heard and read, these are ordinary farms nowhere near strategic areas where a sniper could indeed be hiding, waiting to cause havoc.

But on isolated farms on the outskirts of the city? Unless there is more information that we are not yet privy to, it seems more vindictive than security-conscious.

Kevin,
You said "They make no bones about it, they are happy that Saddam and the Bathists have been ousted, but they are not comfortable being occupied by foreign troops."
Yet the latest Gallup poll shows 71% of the capital city's residents do not want the troops to leave in the next few months.
Will you expand upon this, please?
Nice to have you blogging again!

Kevin, glad your blog is back. To expand on Ordi's point, I'll paraphrase what one blogger (I can't recall who) said. A roller coaster death at Disneyland is news. A happy uneventfull day is not. But, when you have a country, like Iraq, that has been brutalized for the past 30 years, good news IS news. Alas, far too many in your profession don't see it that way, and prefer to treat it like a gang banging in Watts. The reality is, that when you compare the casualties the U.S. military has suffered in two years of war, to the yearly murder toll in Washington, D.C., the military comes out ahead. Mayor Williams would be esctatic, if he could report a one year toll to match. That, however, is not the reality the media is reporting from Iraq.

Edited by author 10-13-2003 11:36 PM
Lance,

maybe it is not the trees that are dangerous maybe it is what hides in those trees. I don't know about you but I'd rather save a soldiers life than save a tree. But that is me.

It is the first principle of journalistic ethics, “learn the truth and report it.”Responsible media don’t pursue these casualties as just a policy scorecard, but as an indication of the actual human costs of this endeavor as well as a documentation of the sacrifice made by those individuals.

So is the only truth that our Soldiers are being killed?
Maybe if you read Chief Wiggles (GI Blogging from Baghdad http://chiefwiggles.blog-city.com/) you'd have some other truth to report on. He has asked his readers to send toys and he is handing them out to some of the children in Baghdad. What about all the GOOD things our Troops are doing? Doesn't that also document their sacifice? The American people do not ask for journalist to report only the good just the ENTIRE story. Good AND Bad! Or as one major news network says, Fair and Balanced!

Can anyone explain to me the systematic destruction by the U.S. Army of palm groves and citrus orchards in and around Baghdad?

Are they truly for security reasons or reprisals for locals who have refused to cooperate with coalition forces in flushing out dissidents?

How "dangerous" can these trees possibly be?

Terrorism exploits a democracy's free press to attack the morale of its people by dominating the news cycle. It is really scary to read how you so uncritically let them to do this.

"Every American television network covered the on-time opening of the Iraqi school year with thousands of students treated to rehabilitated buildings, new desks and textbooks. But when American troops are killed in Iraq—no one can argue which story should take precedence."

Well, I'm going to argue. Yes, it is important to cover the occurance of casualties in Iraq. But, to do so in the order of precedence you state is to ignore the fact that they are there to conduct a mission. The mission's progress is story number one, not story number two. To extend your logic to it's ultimate conclusion is to suggest that all deaths in the military worldwide should eat up our airwaves, night in and night out. This approach takes the sacrifice out of context, and in so doing, belittles it.

Kate
http://www.katewerk.com

Welcome back Kevin and thanks for the great work and sharing it...

Great to have you back, Kevin. I enjoyed reading your site and watching you this spring. Your insight is really priceless. Be well.

~Susan
http://easybakecoven.net/

New to the blog, but you can guarantee I will not be a stranger. I enjoy and appreciate your style, dood.

Welcome back Kevin, I look forward to reading your updates. Stay safe.

Glad MSNBC is being more flexible -- stay well and safe and post as often as you can.