Why don't the major networks and print media have embedded reporters reporting only the bad and rarely good?

Question

such as all the schools and infurstruction being build or the Kurds in the North that are so thankful the U.S being there. Is it that you are so anti-Bush that you refuse to report all the good things happening in Iraq, because if you present a positive side to the war people who only get their opinions based on a 30 second sound bite might have a different view of the war effert. And there are lots of positive things happening in Irqaq

Answer 1

The primary reason is that hings are so great in Iraq that it is far too dangerous for reporters to move around the country.

As for the infrastructure, it's not coming along all that well. The level of oil being pumped continues to decline, delivery of water and electrical service is no better and the building of schools might be impressive if the schools had never existed before they were bombed during the invasion.

Is it that you are so in love with Bush and his failed adventure that you refuse to accept even your leaders acknowledgment of what a mess they have created? Or, is it that you just can't bring yourself to admit you were, and continue to be, wrong?

.

Answer 2

You said, "Why don't the major networks and print media have embedded reporters reporting only the bad and rarely good?"

I think what you mean to say is, "Why DO the network and media have embedded reporters reporting only the bad and rarely good?"

I don't think this is the case at all. I've seen plenty of stories where the coverage was about American troops building the infrastructure, etc.

In any case, your comments suggest that the intelligence of the general public can be manipulated easily by propaganda being disguised as news. Many of us are not easily categorized - people are not "anti-Bush" or anti-American simply because they may disagree with the war. For example, I am pro-defense - I just think worrying about Iran, North Korea, and Afghanistan would have been smarter than punching into a hornet's nest, as we did with Iraq (not Irqaq).

News is rarely as simple as we would like it to be, and most stories today have multiple layers to them. I think most media (with the exception of Fox News) does a great job of showing those complexities.

There are some positive things, indeed, happening in Iraq. There are also lots of negative things. Lack of support from the military for our troops (ie, not having the equipment or protective gear needed to fight/stay alive) is one of them.

Answer 3

How about you checking your question? Do you really want the major networks to have (your ? says "why DON'T") embeddded reporters reporting only the bad & rarely the good? As far as the Anti-Bush news goes, it comes from the simple to see fact that neither the Sunni's (secular) we took out of power there and the Pro Sadr & Pro Iranian Shia (Islamic Fund's) want democracy or western/American way of life. It may be hard for you to understand that OUR values are not THEIR values but it is their
country. We have given more than enough time for them to
"stand up", we have spent more than enough $ also. We have also spent more than enough American lives, killed our wounded for life, for them to decide. They have decided and it is to kill each other to gain control of THEIR country. Ask yourself, how many Iraqis have been killed since we declared an end to major military action? I know you do not know since our government has been holding back the really bad news of what some Generals would like to call a civil war but fear for their career.
Remember Rummy-the-Dummy, 6 days, 6 weeks, maybe 6 months, but never a clue about 6 years. Now add that BS along with Bush saying before the election he would stay(both the Dummy & the USA in Iraq)until the end of his term but now after the election the Dummy is gone & a "new" plan (err, guess that says something about "staying the course") will now be put forth after the new Sec of D has some time to try & put it back together.
Your question is as wrong as the war. The government is even filtering the bad news FYI, the real news is even worse!

Answer 4

The News Media is a money hungry business that sells sensationalism. They only report things they think people will purchase the newspapers for. They don't care what the truth is or who it affects or how it tears this country apart. They say they are neutral on politics but the truth is they are very Democratic. Look how Clinton got away with things since they were not reported with ernest compared to the things they are saying about President Bush.

Answer 5

The same reason we just can't stop starring at the person that was just decapitated in a horrible car crash. People need something to compare their own lives too, bad news elsewhere elevates how they feel about their own lives. The US media is the best tool a terrorist could ever dream for.

Answer 6

Bad news is much more exciting because it is generally fast moving and action packed. Good news takes time to explain and does not fit the preconceived notion that we are wrong to be in Iraq.

Answer 7

The main stream media does not report ANTHING that could be remotely concieved as happy, uplifting, or positive!