You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Fifth Column
Reporters Say Networks Put Wars on Back Burner - Too much success
2008-06-23
Reporting success might leave the perception the MSM is a Cheerleader for Bush.
Getting a story on the evening news isnÂ’t easy for any correspondent. And for reporters in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is especially hard, according to Lara Logan, the chief foreign correspondent for CBS News. So she has devised a solution when she is talking to the network.

“Generally what I say is, ‘I’m holding the armor-piercing R.P.G.,’ ” she said last week in an appearance on “The Daily Show,” referring to the initials for rocket-propelled grenade. “ ‘It’s aimed at the bureau chief, and if you don’t put my story on the air, I’m going to pull the trigger.’ ”
The Daily Show, now there's a beacon of journalistic excellence.
Ms. Logan let a sly just-kidding smile sneak through as she spoke, but her point was serious. Five years into the war in Iraq and nearly seven years into the war in Afghanistan, getting news of the conflicts onto television is harder than ever. “If I were to watch the news that you hear here in the United States, I would just blow my brains out because it would drive me nuts,” Ms. Logan said.
This is not news, Ms. Logan, it has been driving us nuts for years.
According to data compiled by Andrew Tyndall, a television consultant who monitors the three network evening newscasts, coverage of Iraq has been “massively scaled back this year.” Almost halfway into 2008, the three newscasts have shown 181 weekday minutes of Iraq coverage, compared with 1,157 minutes for all of 2007. The “CBS Evening News” has devoted the fewest minutes to Iraq, 51, versus 55 minutes on ABC’s “World News” and 74 minutes on “NBC Nightly News.” (The average evening newscast is 22 minutes long.)

CBS News no longer stations a single full-time correspondent in Iraq, where some 150,000 United States troops are deployed.

Paul Friedman, a senior vice president at CBS News, said the news division does not get reports from Iraq on television “with enough frequency to justify keeping a very, very large bureau in Baghdad.” He said CBS correspondents can “get in there very quickly when a story merits it.”
Good news is not of any particular merit.
In a telephone interview last week, Ms. Logan said the CBS News bureau in Baghdad was “drastically downsized” in the spring. The network now keeps a producer in the country, making it less of a bureau and more of an office.
Basra, Sadr City, and Mosul a success, casualties lowest of the war, violence down 80%, Surge troops going home by the thousands, refugees coming home, nope, no story here, move along, keep moving, nothing to see here folks.
Interviews with executives and correspondents at television news networks suggested that while the CBS cutbacks are the most extensive to date in Baghdad, many journalists shared varying levels of frustration about placing war stories onto newscasts. “I’ve never met a journalist who hasn’t been frustrated about getting his or her stories on the air,” said Terry McCarthy, an ABC News correspondent in Baghdad.
The Ugliest Dog and Paris Hilton are using up all the airtime. ( That sounds redundant.)
By telephone from Baghdad, Mr. McCarthy said he was not as busy as he was a year ago. A decline in the relative amount of violence “is taking the urgency out” of some of the coverage, he said. Still, he gets on ABC’s “World News” and other programs with stories, including one on Friday about American gains in northern Iraq.
How did that ever get past the editors and producers?
Anita McNaught, a correspondent for the Fox News Channel, agreed. “The violence itself is not the story anymore,” she said. She counted eight reports she had filed since arriving in Baghdad six weeks ago, noting that cable news channels like Fox News and CNN have considerably more time to fill with news than the networks. CNN and Fox each have two full time correspondents in Iraq.

Richard Engel, the chief lacky foreign correspondent for NBC News, who splits his time between Iraq and other countries, said he found his producers “very receptive to stories about Iraq.” He and other journalists noted that the heated presidential primary campaign put other news stories on the back burner earlier this year.

Ms. Logan said she begged for months to be embedded with a group of Navy Seals, and when she came back with the story, a CBS producer said to her, “One guy in uniform looks like any other guy in a uniform.” In the follow-up phone interview, Ms. Logan said the producer no longer worked at CBS. And in both interviews, she emphasized that many journalists at CBS News are pushing for war coverage, specifically citing Jeff Fager, the executive producer of “60 Minutes.” CBS News won a Peabody Award last week for a “60 Minutes” report about a Marine charged in the killings at Haditha.
One Asshat reporter looks like any other Asshat reporter.
Figures, CBS considers Haditha to be 'war news' ...
On “The Daily Show,” Ms. Logan echoed the comments of other journalists when she said that many Americans seem uninterested in the wars now. Mr. McCarthy said that when he is in the United States, bringing up Baghdad at a dinner party “is like a conversation killer.”
Seen one war, you've seen them all.
Coverage of the war in Afghanistan has increased slightly this year, with 46 minutes of total coverage year-to-date compared with 83 minutes for all of 2007. NBC has spent 25 minutes covering Afghanistan, partly because the anchor Brian Williams visited the country earlier in the month. Through Wednesday, when an ABC correspondent was in the middle of a prolonged visit to the country, ABC had spent 13 minutes covering Afghanistan. CBS has spent eight minutes covering Afghanistan so far this year.

Both Ms. Logan and Mr. McCarthy noted that more coalition soldiers were killed in Afghanistan in May than in Iraq. No American television network has a full-time correspondent in Afghanistan, although CNN recently said it would open a bureau in Kabul.

“It’s terrible,” Ms. Logan said in the telephone interview. She called it a financial decision. “We can’t afford to maintain operations in Iraq and Afghanistan at the same time,” she said. “It’s so expensive and the security risks are so great that it’s prohibitive.”

Mr. Friedman said coverage of Iraq is enormously expensive, mostly due to the security risks. He said meetings with other television networks about sharing the costs of coverage have faltered for logistical reasons.
Since, by and large they all report the same crap, sharing should be a no brainer.
How does Michael Yon manage ...
Journalists at all three American television networks with evening newscasts expressed worries that their news organizations would withdraw from the Iraqi capital after the November presidential election. They spoke only on the condition of anonymity in order to avoid offending their employers.
That says it all!
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#22  .com didn't croak. He just chose to concentrate on his non-electronic life again. I do miss him, though.
Posted by: trailing wife   2008-06-23 22:45  

#21  You're welcome to go elsewhere.
Posted by: Pappy   2008-06-23 21:42  

#20  Ya know, ever since .com croaked, the comments on this site really suck.
Posted by: Omeaper Black2123   2008-06-23 19:45  

#19  Not surprised he's a Stuart. Surprised his first name isn't Charles.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2008-06-23 15:47  

#18  Correction, folks in hollywood tended to anglicize there names quite apart from any particular political ideology, afaik.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2008-06-23 14:01  

#17  Jack: Throw in Richard Dreyfus, Dustin Hoffman, Ed Harris, Al Pacino, Henry Winkler, etc. John Wayne towered over them all in more ways than one.
Posted by: GolfBravoUSMC   2008-06-23 13:37  

#16  With a state controlled press you have information controlled by bitter men in ill fitted rumpled suits with significant ego problems.

With our MSM you have information controlled by bitter men in ill fitted rumpled suits with significant ego problems.

Well, at least they're not gun totting or bible carrying, isn't it wonderful :)
Posted by: Procopius2k   2008-06-23 13:08  

#15  Funny thing is that now its the REPORTERS whoa re being silenced by lefty editors. The reporters who have been there done that - and have seen the change. They want to report on it - thats how impressive a job our military has done.

Yest the a-hole elitists in the editorial positions refuse to balance out their previous tsunami of reporting negative events.

They are dishonest ideologues who are damaging the fabric of our democracy by DELIBERATELY mis-informing the public that relies on them - the same public that needs to make INFORMED judgments when voting.

Dereliction of duty is the charge against the press.
Posted by: OldSpook   2008-06-23 12:59  

#14  Affirmative Gulf Bravo, consider the line-up of Charlie Sheen (Estevez), Tom Cruise, Al Franken, et.al. - all midgets or vertically challenged.
Posted by: Jack is Back!   2008-06-23 12:58  

#13  Performers often take a stage name because their real name is considered unattractive, dull, unintentionally amusing or difficult to pronounce or spell, or projects the wrong image.

Historically, Lefties in Hollywood were encouraged to anglicize their names to avoid possible stereotyping of a particular ethnic background.


Jon Stewart

VITAL STATISTICS
Date of Birth: November 28, 1962

Birthplace: New York, NY

Raised: Lawrence Township, New Jersey (near Trenton)

Current Residence: Downtown Manhattan, New York, New York

Name at Birth: Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz. Note: Most sources incorrectly list Jon's middle name as Stewart. We have confirmed that Stuart is the correct spelling.

Name Change: Filed petition for legal name change to Jon Stewart on June 19, 2001. Cited several reasons for making the change. Pick which one you believe:
- To protect loved ones from embarrassment (they signed a petition)
- Too many syllables
- Too Hollywood
- Too mispronounceable
- Slight leftover family resentment

Height: 5' 7"

FAMILY

Parents:
- Donald Leibowitz, Physicist
- Marian Leibowitz, Educational Consultant (former elementary special education teacher)

Spouse:
- Tracey Lynn Stewart (formerly Tracey McShane)
- Publicly announced engagement on June 1999.
- Married since approximately November 1999.

Height: 5' 7" - So many Hollywood lefties are little (as in short or petty, you choose) men with BIG egos.
Posted by: GolfBravoUSMC   2008-06-23 12:27  

#12  McCarthy's a good man. Though I watch barely any network "news" at all since coming back, I've caught two of his stories (including the one the other night about US forces playing soccer with locals in a formerly hostile Sunni area) - the first was one of the very first network pieces to talk about the change in tone in Baghdad once the surge got under way. He made a two-year commitment to Iraq and I find it very credible that he'd like to get more stories - including mostly positive ones - on the air. The bosses in New York? Well I refer you to some of the intemperate comments above.

As for Lara Logan, glad to hear she slapped Stewart around a bit. While some of her instincts did seem a bit default MSM, she is a brave and passionate reporter, who's almost been killed several times by insisting on being in the thick of the s**t when she can. To a great extent she overcomes her truly stunning beauty - which isn't her fault, after all - with passion and courage.

The CBS bureau wasn't particularly large. Thing is, both explanations here are correct: the networks (and news agencies in general) are struggling businesses, and their Iraq operations are hugely expensive, AND for many reasons (mostly bad) they simply don't want to cover the good news.

I think the commenter here who noted that the public doesn't care to hear about Iraq is also correct. In fact the disinterest - usually accompanied with lots of negative feelings and not much understanding - in Iraq has been very discouraging. Combined with the astonishing cowardice (GOP) and irresponsibility/cluelessness (DEM) of the political class and the AWOL White House, it's outrageous and disgusting.

I think Anonymoose has a point - on balance, out of sight and out of mind may be the best combo for a country where a huge and influential minority are uninformed and hobbled by silly misconceptions (think NPR listeners and coastal, urban MSM drones).
Posted by: Verlaine   2008-06-23 11:34  

#11  What's the point? If you can't use it to skewer the Bushitler Regime or Haliburton, you might as well be reporting on, like, boring current events and stuff.
Posted by: SteveS   2008-06-23 11:07  

#10  The truth is that in balance it is actually better for the MSM to leave Iraq and Afghanistan alone.

To start with, so much good news *does* mean that things are becoming more stable and normal. And that is worth more than any amount of emotional gratification.

Second, it also puts our military personnel under less pressure. They can just do their jobs instead of fretting about how what they are doing will be misinterpreted in the news. And it also means that enemy propaganda also gets ignored.

Third, it will mean that there will be less opposition to the US staying there for a while in leased bases, like Germany after WWII. Hopefully the public will forget that the military is even over there, like in Korea.

The bottom line is that the MSM doesn't help the US military. It just doesn't. So out of sight, out of mind.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2008-06-23 10:02  

#9  I saw that Daily Show interview. Ms. Logan was scathing, and openly opposed every one of Mr. Stuart's MSM memes based on her own experience and statistics. The poor man really doesn't know how to handle a beautiful, intelligent, informed, and passionate woman.
Posted by: trailing wife    2008-06-23 10:01  

#8  Bunch of self serving leaches that have sold their own country downriver for money and fame.

Rope. Tree. Journalist.
Some assembly required.
Posted by: DarthVader   2008-06-23 09:28  

#7  Actually 40% or so of the American populace believe the war is going "badly or very badly" - and the press wants to keep it that way for Obama and the Dems.

So after relentless negative coverage, they refuse to print th truth - the truth being thatt he war is going well, that casualties are down, that the Iraqis seem to be making military and political progress -- and most of all, that the press and their political allies were WRONG when they screamed quagmire and painted a false picture of gloom and defeat in order to gain political power.
Posted by: OldSpook   2008-06-23 09:17  

#6  One Asshat reporter looks like any other Asshat reporter.

I'd only add that: One Asshat reporter lies like any other Asshat reporter lies.
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2008-06-23 09:14  

#5  Note, the working journos on the ground in Iraq, WANT to report the improvements, its the management in NY, DC, etc who have other concerns.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2008-06-23 09:12  

#4  Unfortunately the MSM and Democratic party has tied their wagon to the 'Another Vietnam' and, as a result, for them (MSM+DNC) to 'win' American must lose the WOT. Lose and Lose big. Just ask Harry "The war in lost " Ried.

No the MSM wants DEAD AMERICANS to paste over the network and blame Bush for - the more the better.

Posted by: CrazyFool   2008-06-23 08:39  

#3  No sensationalism there, the MSM wants BLOOD and GORE (pardon the pun). Truth be known, more GI's are slain in motorcycle and car accidents each month in CONUS. It's much safer being deployed. The "war" is over, it's a mop up exercise now thanks to General Petraeus leadership and his officers and men.
Posted by: Besoeker   2008-06-23 08:08  

#2  As if we needed any more proof that the sons of bitches who run the MSM hate the United States with an undying passion.

I can't remember which 'Burger keeps writing, "First the traitors, then the enemy," but he's absolutely spot on. I'd like nothing better than to be a juror in a treason trial for Keith Olbermann or Dan Rather.
Posted by: Thaimble Scourge of the Pixies4707   2008-06-23 07:12  

#1  Iraq movies are box office poison. Face it: it is another no-win war. How much Vietnam coverage was there is 1975? Little. The public didn't want it. But they dumped the no-win party in favor of the disastrous Soviet-winning-streak of the Carter fiasco. Then it was win-win with Reagan.
Posted by: McZoid   2008-06-23 06:58  

00:00