I've made that no secret. Heck even my quote from Bill Moyers, "We have an ideological press that's interested in the election of Republicans, and a mainstream press that's interested in the bottom line. Therefore, we don't have a vigilant, independent press whoseinterest is the American people," confirms my personal caution of the media.
However, I wanted to start a new threat in response to:
Where's the tv news coverage of a worsened Iraq?
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...showtopic=23474
Because despite my cartoons and attacks on the mainstream media, ARMY DAD is willing to admit when he may be wrong or if there appears to be a shift in media approach for some reason.
In Ohio recently, we have began to notice media outlets that if one did a google search supported the Bush/Cheney ticket during the 2004 election have become suddenly very critical of various aspects of the handling of the War in Iraq.
This includes TV coverage of military recruiter abuses by a Cincinnati TV station's undercover crew (Cincinnatti is an overwhelmingly Republican area that went for Bush in 2004?) which led to a national scandal that resulted in the Pentagon calling for a "one day" halt in military recruiting so that their recruiters could be "reminded" not to get caught doing these things in the future. The Pentagon's response was the same old Bush admin refrain, "it's only a few bad apples," but let Army Dad assure you that under pressure to meet their quotas during a very unpopular war which over half the American population DOES NOT SUPPORT, most military recruiters were abusing the system and ONLY A FEW BAD APPLES GOT CAUGHT.
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...=0&#entry292287
This is not to blame the military recruiters except for not being honest with recruits about the dangers they may face if sent into combat. As a career military man myself, I realize it is their job to recruit given we have no national draft to sustain the numbers required to occupy Iraq indefinitely.
Below is an article in the Columbus Dispatch which also shows a continuing shift in media view as a result of the papers coverage of growing military funerals in Ohio. Again one only has to do a google search to see that the Columbus Dispatch Editorial Staff endorsed the entire Republican ticket, including Bush/Cheney, during the 2004 election plus gave advise on how Bush could win the peace in Iraq. This shift is quite signficant:
THE INSIDE STORY
Covering local military funerals honors sacrifice
BENJAMIN J. MARRISON
Driving past a funeral home in Pickerington Sunday night, I saw men and women in dress military uniforms, waiting to pay their respects to a fallen Marine. They were there to say goodbye to Dustin Derga, a young man who gave his life in service to his country.
Regardless of your feelings about our nation’s decision to go to war in Iraq, you can’t help but feel an odd combination of pride, sadness and anger when witnessing these funerals, which are growing far too common. Your heart breaks for the mothers and fathers crying over the loss of life, or the young women talking about the engagement rings that never came.
A reader recently wrote to suggest that The Dispatch is giving more prominence to stories about the fallen soldiers than the daily successes in Iraq because we’re liberal and opposed to President Bush’s decision to attack.
Half of that comment is accurate, the rest insulting.
(Remember, Army Dad said do a google search and one will see that the editorial staff of the Columbus Dispatch endorsed the Bush/Cheney ticket. In fact: the entire Republican ticket. http://dispatch.com/election/election-loca...is-endorse.html
We are clearly giving greater prominence to the deaths of local men and women in Iraq than to other stories from the war front.
But our motive is rooted in respect, not politics. When local troops die in the name of the United States, we feel an obligation to pay tribute to them, as did the Pickerington mourners and thousands of others who have filled Ohio funeral homes more than 60 times since the offensive began.
Since area soldiers and Marines began dying in Iraq, we’ve printed each of their stories on the front page or the Metro & State cover. We’ve sent a staff photographer and reporter to every local funeral.
If the situation in Iraq grows worse, and more local soldiers and Marines are killed, we might be forced to change our approach. But for now, we want to tell every one of their stories. This week alone, we wrote about four local heroes.
A few families are too distraught to talk about their losses, and we respect that. We empathize with them.
But we still feel an obligation to share the life stories of their loved ones and pay tribute to their military service.
Our reporters talk to friends of the families, former classmates and teachers, and others who know the heroes’ life stories. Our photographers are mindful to avoid being intrusive or disrespectful. We’ve heard nothing but compliments from the families of our fallen soldiers and Marines, even those families initially uncomfortable with media coverage.
Typically, stories steeped in emotion are easy to tell. They almost write themselves. But funerals of young people are among the most difficult stories to cover, both in photos and words.
Alice Cervantes covered the Derga funeral. As she left the newsroom Monday night, Cervantes said she needed to go home and decompress, to recover from the emotional drain. ‘‘It was so sad,’’ she said.
The next morning, Cervantes covered the funeral of Army Pfc. Nicolas Messmer. He was 20.
‘‘The hardest part is having to keep it together, holding it in during the services, especially when taps is played. And when they fold the flag and give it to the parents. And when they sing Amazing Grace,’’ Cervantes said.
‘‘I thought I was fine but ended up breaking down in the bathroom.’’
Reporter Randy Ludlow has covered six military funerals, the first of which came while his son, a Marine sergeant, served in Iraq during the war’s opening months.
‘‘As a military father, I hope I have special empathy for the fallen and their families. I try in my stories to honor them by allowing the emotion of their farewells to color my words,’’ Ludlow said. ‘‘It is tough. I have come back from funerals and cried while writing.’’
Reporter Jeb Phillips has covered five military funerals in recent months.
‘‘In my mind, the hardest thing in journalism is calling parents and asking about a child who has died. The war deaths may be even worse, because they were doing something they thought was right and important,’’ Phillips said.
We pour our hearts into these stories, because we want each to be as special as the hero we are writing about.
We appreciate that once the funeral ends, and the relatives and friends return to their homes, the one thing grieving families can carry into the future is the story and photographs published in the newspaper. They become keepsakes for the families of those left behind.
I think we owe them at least that much.
Benjamin Marrison is editor of The Dispatch.
bmarrison@dispatch.com
Here is the response of one of the founders of our website http://americansforsharedsacrifice.org/ :
Dear Mr. Marrison. I would like to thank the Dispatch for publishing the stories of the brave young soldiers from here in Ohio who died in Iraq. Their service and sacrifice to their country should never be allowed to go unnoticed.
The person or persons who criticized this reporting are very likely some of the Americans who are never going to see a day of service or share in the national sacrifice required to implement the Bush war in Iraq. They will never know sleepless nights waiting for news of a loved-one's status in a war zone. They will never know the anguish parents feel when burying their children or children praying by the grave of their parent.
I served with young US soldiers, some as young as 17 years of age, who shipped out for duty overseas in anonymity, fought and died in anonymity, and were shipped home to be buried by their families in anonymity. Few if anyone outside their families ever knew of their ultimate sacrifice to their country except their comrades in arms, people like myself.
This is the alternative to reporting about these beautiful young men's sacrifice: anonymity. For me, there is no greater crime a government and society can commit against its soldiers.
I have spent the majority of my adult life fighting against wars started based on lies, a government that neglects its veterans and a society that abandons its soldiers on the field of battle due to a short attention span - as we have done once again in Iraq.
I have done this partly to honor and remember the young men that I served with who died in anonymity between 1966-1967. Vietnam? No, the DMZ in Korea. Few people in this country remember the Korean War, let alone the "DMZ war" in Korea that occurred between 1966 and 1969. American soldiers did their job. In some cases that meant dying. No one noticed, no one cared.
Thank you and your reporters for assuring this doesn't happen this time, in this town, with these young American servicemen.
Mark Hartford
Columbus, OH
PS: You might find this web site interesting. I am one of the sponsors of it:
http://americansforsharedsacrifice.org/
PSS: Write me back and I'll send you the names of the men who died in the year I was in the Korean DMZ.
Final note from Army Dad: Most significant in the Columbus Dispatch endorsement of Bush/Cheney and most likely a key to why they (and other media outlets that endorsed Bush - now attack his administration is this understanding)
If he is elected, Bush should make good on his pledge to reduce the deficit by half. Better yet, he should eliminate it. The president refuses to acknowledge mistakes, and that is unlikely to change in a second term. But he still should correct them.
He should put enough troops and resources into Iraq and Afghanistan to get the job done. He should ask the American people to make the sacrifices necessary to achieve that, even if that means paying more taxes.
Since Sept. 11, Americans have been ready and willing to sacrifice to avenge the attacks and prevent future ones. Bush shouldn't hesitate any longer: Enlist them in the fight. That might be one way to heal the deep division that now afflicts the country.
After all, four years ago, Bush promised to be a uniter, not a divider. Perhaps more than any other, he should make good on that promise.
Well THE TRUTH is going to anger the moral majority (and others) but Americans vs-a-va September 11, 2005 and the War in Iraq are HYPOCRITES. Americans ARE NOT willing to sacrifice to avenge the attacks and prevent future ones, because Iraq had nothing to do with the attacks. There is NO WAY Bush or anyone else is going to ENLIST the majority of Americans in the fight in Iraq when over half the nation remains divided over the costs being worth it to fight and die in Iraq for QUESTIONABLE reasons not a clear threat to the United States. With all due respect the President has the legal and constituation authority to implement THE DRAFT, Bush shouldn't hesitate any longer: Enlist the American people in the fight if they have been ready and willing to sacrifice to avenge the attacks and prevent future ones. That just MIGHT be one way to heal the deep division that STILL afflicts the country. After all, four years ago Bush promised to be a uniter, not a divider. Perhaps more than any other, the President should make good on that promise and UNITE us in "National Shared Sacrifice" in his war in Iraq.
