Just getting back to the original point. The US P.O.W.s may well have been executed. They may not have. But I don't really think we can believe everything coming out of the Pentagon right now. The American's have lost some credibility in some of the false stories that have emerged such as Tariq Aziz's flight to Turkey, a whole Iraqi division surrendering and yesterday they initially denied responsibility for the missile that killed scores of women and children in Baghdad.
Now the aljazeera english language web site has been mysteriously shut down and the latest news was that western reporters were being encouraged by the armed forces to leave northern Iraq. As many feared this war is becoming increasingly bloody and the US will make every effort to hide any attocities they carry out.
But really, this is a war, we can expect both sides to carry out horrendous acts. The point is that war should only be undertaken as a last resort. This invasion of Iraq doesn't come into that category.
Caught in a crossfire of spin
March 27 2003
By Josh Getlin, Elizabeth Jensen
The rumours show no signs of going away: Saddam Hussein was killed the first night of the war. Or he was badly injured. Or he escaped and is hiding somewhere in Baghdad.
If there is a thread linking these stories, it is that the media have reported them enthusiastically and uncritically, with no independent verification. They are speculative, based on Pentagon sources, and while their news value is obvious, they also help the Bush Administration reinforce the message of an Iraqi regime in disarray.
On one level, news coverage of the war has produced a flood of vivid, first-hand stories from more than 500 reporters who are travelling with US forces. Yet these dispatches, however compelling, provide only fragmentary glimpses of a vast military effort. To convey the bigger picture, journalists depend on military and government officials for information - and the two sides don't always have the same priorities.
"The potential for the media to be the vehicle for disinformation and propaganda in this war is great, as it is in any conflict," says Stephen Hess, a media and terrorism expert at the Brookings Institution. "We don't expect the US Government to lie, yet we also know that they will put out information during a time of war to confuse the enemy and further their own aims. The question is, can these two be reconciled?"
Some believe that the media must always assume the worst and be vigilant about the source of wartime stories. "A lot of editors have been concerned this past week over the difference between spin and difficult reporting," said David Yarnold, editor and senior vice-president of the San Jose, California, Mercury News. "It's hard to know what the facts are with the sheer volume of news we have pouring in from the battlefield every day."
The media's initial war coverage has already raised a red flag with some critics. Stories about the alleged discovery of an Iraqi chemical weapons factory captivated the world media on Sunday, for example, but were quietly contradicted by Pentagon sources on Monday.
The story was first reported by a Jerusalem Post journalist travelling with the US 3rd Infantry Division in Najaf, who said that troops had captured "the first Iraqi installation that appears to have produced chemical weapons".
Within hours, the story had spread worldwide and was given prominent coverage on Fox News, among several US television networks. Doubts grew about the accuracy of the report, however, and US officials said on Monday that no chemicals were found at the site, which had been abandoned long ago by the Iraqis.
"We got some information from our sources and it seemed to check out fine," said Bill Shine, network executive producer for Fox News Channel. "But eventually we had to pull back" about six hours later, "after getting indications that it wasn't actually the chemical weapons factory."
Many journalists and their editors believe they have a good chance of filtering out disinformation in this campaign, mainly because of the number of reporters travelling with military units. CNN correspondent Christiane Amanpour acknowledged that "in every war, on every side, there is psychological warfare, propaganda. But I don't believe at the moment that we're being necessarily lied to or overtly manipulated."
Yet others say the media - especially cable TV networks - have filled up hours of air time with too much speculation and governmental spin, none of which is subjected to rigorous standards of reporting. There has been persistent speculation on CNN, MSNBC and Fox News, for example, that large numbers of Republican Guard might surrender. But that has yet to happen, prompting some critics to suggest that US journalists need to ask tougher questions.
"I'm astonished at the lack of scepticism in the media so far, especially on television, because we've heard a lot of things reported that may not be true," said Bill Kovach, chairman of the Committee of Concerned Journalists.
Some critics say reporters have yet to challenge what is perhaps the most fundamental governmental message of all - that it is only a matter of time before Saddam is ousted from the power. "So many media say there is 'little doubt' this will happen," Mr Hess said. "But that's a purely American perspective. There are people who say: 'Maybe this is another Viet Cong situation. The Iraqis will wear us down, and five years from now another American president will be evacuating the last people off the roof of the American embassy in Baghdad'."
- Los Angeles Times
- Forums
- General
- iraq has executed pow's: pentagon
Just getting back to the original point. The US P.O.W.s may well...
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 6 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)