Jump to content

Talk:Media coverage of the Iraq War

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Anthere (talk | contribs) at 16:29, 23 April 2003. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

what does "and Geraldo Rivera was sent from Afghanistan after drawing a crude map in the sand, possibly revealing troop movements on air." mean? I thought he was in Iraq! Tompagenet 00:04 Apr 21, 2003 (UTC)

Don't know why Iraq was changed to Afghanistan.. I changed it back. Question: Was any embedded journalist killed by enemy fire? Towards the end of the war, I remember hearing that there hadn't been any - but I can't remember if any were killed after that.
the casualties of journalists being surprisingly low is really a personal position.
the death of a reporter after the war has little to do here
I see not why american news would be "reported" when non-us news "claim". In particular, when there are pictures supporting these reports.


Well, thats why I was asking if ANY embedded journalist was killed. I'm thinking that none were- but I wanted to verify that before I said it. That is why I said "surprisingly low".


But low means little. Some think it is high as soon as there is one death...

True. I intended to change it once I had verification of the question I posted above... I think it was actually zero casualties among embedded journalists wich would be surprisingly low by anyones standards.


ok
death after the war.. who? The war's still going on. Theres a firefight in Baghdad *right now*.
ok. But, why does it have to be there ? Why would the blood clog be necessary related to war ?

Because listing him with casualties implies that he was a casualty of combat. He wasn't. Someone else listed him and conveniently left out how and why he died.

fair
Because that claim is is unverified and a bit silly. I haven't seen anyone else report the same thing. The fall of the statue was reported by everyone - even Arab TV. It happened exactly the way it was seen live on television. What the French media is claiming has not been supported by anyone else. Even Al-Jazeera hasn't supported that to my knowledge.
so the best way to do is to say what is reported on french tv is necessarily wrong and silly. Of course. The fact the place was empty is not silly, there are some pictures, and I put some links to support this. It was also supported by british.

No, not necessarily. But in this case, yes, it is silly. I watched it happen. Live. There was no way this was staged.. It took all morning to knock that statue down.. if it was staged they would have done it within minutes. If it was staged - there probably would have been larger crowds. If it was staged there would have been more "PR" shots of Iraqis waving US flags and stuff like that. Until its supported by a larger number of media organizations or until a memo is found telling US troops "Hey, lets stage a media event around the statue in Baghdad" or until an out of work Iraqi actor comes forward and says I was paid $5 to tear the sta

I think you are misconsidering propaganda cleverness :-) Some says too much info kills info. But, right, let's keep claim. French media showed pictures of the near-empty place, and two pictures are showing the same guy in two different places at 3 days intervals. One of this place being the statue place. I sure hope for him he received more than 5 bucks *if* it was really him both times, and *if* it was not just one of these rare and surprising events which make the salt of life.
often questioning and refusing to believe reports coming from Coalition sources while reporting Iraqi claims of civilian casualties without independent verification. need sources for "often"
Just watch non-US TV. Its all over non-US TV - especially Arab TV.


If it is all over tv, I am sure it is also all over the net. So, please provide a link.

Other wiki contributors have already done that for me. Just look at some of the other Iraq war articles.

please which articles ?

Why remove the reason the British navy removed the BBC from their ship? Why remove that David Bloom died of a blood clot?

please explain to me where the interest of the death of Mr Bloom is in this article

I don't know. I didn't add him. I only added why and how he died. See above.

Saying there were high casualties among journalists is a POV. There were only a few.. its surprising there weren't more.
agreed, both sentences are pov

Agreed.



Removed anchor quotes: For example:

Anchor Neal Cavuto said of those "who opposed the liberation of Iraq": "You were sickening then, you are sickening now." Anchor John Gibson said he hoped "the dopey old U.N." would not be responsible for Iraq's reconstruction A correspondent called anti-war protestors "the great unwashed" Other networks had strongly pro-war commentators, including MSNBC. For example:

"They are absolutely committing sedition, or treason." "These leftist stooges for anti-American causes are always given a free pass. Isn't it time to make them stand up and be counted for their views?" --exchange between commentator Michael Savage and Joe Scarborough on Savage's MSNBC talk show

The reason: All of these networks have strongly pro-war and strongly anti-war commentators and anchors. Why pick out the quotes of a few for this article? I can name as many people on some of these networks that were very clearly against the war as I can people that were for it.

If you can find quotations from strongly anti-war commentators and anchors, then I'll believe the claim. --The Cunctator
Not sure how relevant this is, but I think Fox literally did some flag waving at one point http://www.jsonline.com/enter/tvradio/apr03/131964.asp. --erzengel 1540 UTC - 23 Apr 2003

"The images of the statue falling came as a shock to many Arab viewers who had been led to believe that Iraq was winning the war."

eh? I thought most Arab viewers were shocked by the lack of support and rapid collapse of the regime. --erzengel 1540 UTC - 23 Apr 2003


Who is "Robert Entman"? Why should any weight be attached to his views? -- 217.24.129.50 15:51 Apr 23, 2003 (UTC)

He is an American professor in communication in the University of North Carolina in the US. Authored several books. His next book to publish is "Projections of Power", which is said to analyse impact of medias on foreign politics. I think typing his name in google will give you any further indication of why any weight could be attached to his views. On the first 10 hits, I found http://www.ncsu.edu/chass/communication/www/faculty_profiles/entman/ which should help you.

As it happens, this man is enlightened enough to give interviews to foreign journalists (hear, non american) which allow non american to benefit from his views from time to time. :-) User:anthere