I'm starting to the think so. I just heard an ABC news report that read:
"6 insurgents were killed in a recent battle, however, although unconfirmed, it appears woman and children may have died as well."
WHAT? "Unconfirmed"......how can you possible report something "unconfirmed." Folks, I hear this sorta negative media spin every day and it's beyond ridiculous.
2007-02-22 04:47:55 · 23 answers · asked by Robert S 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I agree that the media has great reasons for being there, but this absurd, one-sided reporting is getting insane.
2007-02-22 04:55:43 · update #1
If you think the media is giving an accurate report of the war, well, I've got some ocean-front property in Nebraska for sale.
2007-02-22 05:18:15 · update #2
I will tell you what my Son and other Soldiers who are serving in Iraq I talk to tell me- Stop watching the news! My Son said it isn't "as" bad as the media makes it. He say's you don't see the good things that are happening over there. It is a war and horrible things are happening, but there is also a lot of good things happening. As a Mom of a Soldier- it is very hard not watch the news.
2007-02-22 05:00:49 · answer #1 · answered by Shaun K 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
No, they provide a more unbiased view of conflicts than Governments would allow. Abu Graib would never have been international knowledge if not for the media.
However I do believe that the media should be more RESPONSIBLE in there reporting and stop with the sensationalism - whether pro-Republican, pro-Democrat or what-not.
It does no good to report "unconfirmed" information. Report what you know, not what you think you know but know will get you ratings.
Of course if advertisers were to demand changes, they would get them because the news can't survive without advertising money, but they only care about ratings and are quite happy with ANYTHING being there, so long as it gets them the eyeballs.
2007-02-22 12:55:32 · answer #2 · answered by David M 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
NO! The US NEEDS to know what is going on over there! Why? Because it is OUR TAX PAYERS MONEY THAT IS FUNDING IT! I don't trust the pentagon to tell the truth, so the only other place is the news agencies.
"Unconfirmed" means just that. Why look into it more than there is. As far as the "Negative" media spin...I don't think that has all to do with the media. I would say it has more to do with the fact that it IS a negative situation that we are in over there! Being in the middle of a civil war between the Shea's and Sunni's can't be spun positively.
2007-02-22 13:10:58 · answer #3 · answered by hera 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, if it wasn't for the media being there, our only source of information would be what the criminal Bush and his cronies would choose to tell us.
And, the term "unconfirmed" in this case would mean that the reporter wasn't there and didn't see it first hand but was informed by someone who was. And, guess why the reporter wasn't there? Bush has forbidden the media to go anywhere at anytime that is not approved ahead of time by his spin doctors in the field.
Bush doesn't want US to know the truth about the death and destruction so our reporters in the field have to rely on local informants..... Bush, you see, doesn't believe in freedom of the press - among other things.
2007-02-22 14:06:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
kick out the independent media and then the military will be the only ones telling the story and that concerns me way more. FYI: in desert storm, Bush senior had the military approve everything that came out of the region. the rockets red glare and the spectacle of war at it's best was all we were allowed to see. when some photo journalists smuggled out some real scenes of warfare it shocked many people but if you deny that then it's all so clean a sterile. War is man creating hell on earth and we should never forget the truth of it.
2007-02-22 12:56:53 · answer #5 · answered by Alan S 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
To the person who said that they show all the gore and none of the glory, have you *read* The Iraq Study Group Report? There is no glory.
I think that the media should report the news in a fair, unbiased way.
2007-02-22 12:57:05 · answer #6 · answered by me41987 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
What would be better is to get more media in Iraq. The more sources and reporters you have, the closer to the truth you can get. One reporter's account is taken with a grain of salt, 25 reporter's accounts can usually be averaged out to find the truth.
2007-02-22 12:52:22 · answer #7 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Hell yah they should. They show a video of US forces being sniped by terrorists, then show a clip of US shooting back, thens witch to a slideshow of babies who have been wounded.
Its sick, they want to make our troops look like murderers (murder being a term which does not apply when your a soldier ina time of war). They imply that its murder in cold blood to protect yourself when your in the army. They want the troops to just be mad at bush and throw down there weapons and throw up their white flags and say " sorry your all freedom fighters, its ok we hate the us to!!" Never in my beloved army.
2007-02-22 13:19:39 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It doesn't matter since any "news" coming out of Iraq is censored by the Pentagon. If we saw what was really happening over there, Americans would demand pulling troops immediately.
2007-02-22 13:16:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I agree that the media is fast and loose with actual journalism. However, I don't think removing journalists is American, as censorship is something our country has always stood four-square against. As you are a concerned American, I know you agree.
2007-02-22 12:52:28 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋