 |
|
 |
| [-] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
Prev | List | Random | Next |
Back in October, we "listened" as journalists discussed strategies news agencies might employ if the (then) four month old trend of increasingly lower U.S. troop fatalities in Iraq continued its downward plunge:
CHARLES GIBSON, ABC ANCHOR: The U.S. military reports the fourth straight month of decline in troop deaths, 66 American troops died in September, each a terrible tragedy for a family, but the number far less than those who died in August. And the Iraqi government says civilian deaths across Iraq fell by half last month.Cynical bastard that I am, I made my own prediction of how the media would deal with a continued decrease in monthly deaths for the remainder of the year. They'd highlight the yearly total instead of the monthly. Was I right?KURTZ: Joining us now to put this into perspective, Robin Wright, who covers national security for The Washington Post. And CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr.
Robin Wright, should that decline in Iraq casualties have gotten more media attention?
ROBIN WRIGHT, THE WASHINGTON POST: Not necessarily. The fact is we're at the beginning of a trend -- and it's not even sure that it is a trend yet. There is also an enormous dispute over how to count the numbers. There are different kinds of deaths in Iraq.
<...>
KURTZ: Barbara Starr, CNN did mostly quick reads by anchors of these numbers. There was a taped report on "LOU DOBBS TONIGHT." Do you think this story deserved more attention? We don't know whether it is a trend or not but those are intriguing numbers.BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: But that's the problem, we don't know whether it is a trend about specifically the decline in the number of U.S. troops being killed in Iraq. This is not enduring progress.
<...>
KURTZ: But let's say that the figures had shown that casualties were going up for U.S. soldiers and going up for Iraqi civilians. I think that would have made some front pages.STARR: Oh, I think inevitably it would have. I mean, that's certainly -- that, by any definition, is news.
Here's the New York Times headline from November 07, 2007: 2007 Is Deadliest Year for U.S. Troops in Iraq. Hell, maybe I gave them the idea.
Of course, after that the death toll remained relatively low (eventually even reaching pre-Mary Mapes levels, surprising even me) , and Iraq vanished from the American media - an event that briefly made its own headlines, accompanied by the complaint that Americans no longer knew the TOTAL death toll from the war!!!
But here's a question our intrepid reporters didn't ask themselves back in October (or December or any time since): What if the death toll in Iraq fell to that in Afghanistan... how could we spin that?
This week USA Today provides the answer: U.S. deaths in Afghanistan near those in Iraq.
Welcome Instapundit readers - while here, please enjoy a visit to our new front page, and thanks for stopping by!
