A local television station in Minneapolis, KSTP, has taken the bold step of refusing to air an issue advertisement by the conservative 527 Progress for America Voter Fund. This "Midwest Heroes" video is an effort to sway public opinion on the war by politicizing troops returned home. These citizen soldiers exercise their free speech to say that the Iraq War is the front in the War on Terror (Al Qaeda is the enemy!) and that the media distorts the real progress being made in Iraq. Their message is driven home by the burning World Trade towers as their backdrop. KSTP's rationale for refusing the ad is that their newscast does not distort the facts, and they will not air a commercial that falsely accuses them of doing so.
In fact, KSTP is correct that the advertisement is false, misleading, inaccurate (ad nauseum). However, these soldiers and their conservative financial backers still have the right to express their opinion. In fact, with the reprehensible misuse of World Trade Center footage as the backdrop, I think increased airtime only enhances the morally vacuous nature of the piece.
But here's the best part. The ads claim that "the media" distorts the truth about Iraq. Let's address a few reasons why the reports from Iraq might not be to the heroes' satisfaction:
- 2,273 American deaths since 2003.
- Al Qaeda only showed up in Iraq because the U.S. decided to attack.
- The whole "going to war on false pretenses" thing.
- "virtually every measure of the performance of Iraq's oil, electricity, water and sewerage sectors has fallen below preinvasion values." (2/9/06 NY Times story by James Glanz)
So what's that media bias, again?
1 comment:
First of all, thanks very much for your post.
To address your concern of bias - it's true, I am posting from a certain perspective. The bullet points were not meant to be objective, but to highlight why it is the media focuses on many salient issues other than the ones raised by the "Midwest Heroes." I would argue that the number of war dead and the stalled progress on infrastructure, as well as the continued strength of the insurgency (as shown by point #1) are all quite newsworthy.
The assertion that we're fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq does not undermine any of these issues, in fact it only raises questions about whether (a) we are winning against Al Qaeda in Iraq (which I would define as reducing the number sabatoge incidents against infrastructure and American troops) and (b) whether there might have been a less costly way to take the war to Al Qaeda. It's not a smear of the troops courage to note that, factually speaking, the quality of infrastructure is poorer now that in the past. And at the price tag (in lives and dollars) of $16 billion, I think it's reasonable to question the strategy. (i.e. let's send our highly professional army to a better battleground, if we can).
The one aspect that the media (and everyone in my opinion) could emphasize more would be the incredible sacrifice that our soldiers are making every hour of every day. They're amazing and I salute their courage and resolve. It's because of my respect for those who volunteer to serve that I think we should ask the hardest questions about when and where we deploy our soldiers. To do so is to gamble their lives and the stakes must be high.
Finally, you offer a counterpoint to my assertion that Al Qaeda was not in Iraq prior to 9/11. Could you provide a citation to a reputable news source (yes, I include Fox News)? I'm certainly willing to revise my understanding, but my cursory search for the truth of "Saddam tapes" wasn't very fruitful.
Post a Comment