March 26, 2003

Media Coverage Of The War

I've been relying on the internet during the day and the cable news networks at night. I think having reporters embedded in the units has worked out great - in fact my biggest complaint about the coverage by the cable people is that they spend too much time with all their military retirees and not enough with their embedded reporters. I think context is important, but a little goes a long way. And if these guys really do know what's going on, they sure as heck aren't going to broadcast it where the Iraqi's can pick it up. So its great to have somebody talk in generalities over a map, but you could do that 10 minutes out of an hour and have it covered.

I've also found myself watching MSNBC the most. I can't put my finger on it, but they just seem to have the best coverage. Britt Hume on Fox is the best when he's on, but he still only comes on for an hour in the evening, and then it's all downhill from there.

I happened to catch the morning Centcom briefing this morning on the radio. It's amazing how little info they give out -- and rightly so. Some reporter asked this morning for them to describe what the war plan was, or at least how many thrusts were being made into Iraq, and how many at Baghdad, since the Iraqi's already know this. Well, maybe they do, and maybe they don't. Why run the risk? The press seems to act like they're not entirely sure that the military only shows the best LGB video. C'mon guys, of course Centcom only shows the best.

Is it possible for the media organizations to send people who have done some homework? Some guy this morning was asking if they kept video of all the precision strikes, and when could he get his hands on it? They put this video dog and pony on every war, couldn't you have thought to confer with the military before the war as to what kind of video you could get and when, and what had happened to it after other wars? They have public affairs officers for just that sort of thing. And while you're at it, wouldn't it have been nice to know what kinds of weapons we use, whether their guidance system does make a record, what the classification of that record is, and so forth, instead of asking what for what percentage of the strikes are such videos available? Do you honestly think the military keeps track of that number in the middle of a war? If you can't look at the video, and tell immediately whether it's from the designator of a LGB, from the seeker of an IIR weapon, or from a JDAM, you shouldn't be at that conference, let alone asking questions. OK, that last sentance was a trick - there is no video record for JDAM since it's an INS/GPS weapon.

Posted by Kevin Murphy at March 26, 2003 12:38 PM | Media Criticism
Comments
We welcome comments. However, use no profanity and be civil.

I almost never catch Hume, but my problem with Fox is the anchors are just bad. Well, okay, so are Lester Holt and Aaron Brown, but on a technical end, the B-team on Fox don't seem to know how to transition well.

Posted by: ArchPundit at March 28, 2003 10:39 AM

To clarify--Hume is quite good when he is on and I do happen to catch him.

Posted by: ArchPundit at March 28, 2003 10:41 AM