A student friend of mine at the MSU Standard had her thoughts to share regarding the conflict in Iraq. I'd say she's a fresh voice, feel free to share yours.
The Crux of the Issue
with
M. Chiles
President Bush seeks to regain public support for the war in Iraq, which began just over 3 years ago.
He sure would like the media to help him out.
There is little “good news†from Iraq to be had on television screens or in newspapers.
Bush wants a broader picture shown. If Americans saw the good the soldiers were doing, it might make the past 3 years seem justified.
Bush is banking on it. A March 18 Newsweek poll indicates his approval rating is 36 percent. Unanswered questions in Iraq are a big factor in the public’s eroding confidence in the president.
He claims he doesn’t pay attention to polls. But clearly war effort marketing needs a new strategy. Forbidding images of flag-draped coffins, so devastating to the national psyche in Vietnam, is still useful.
But people are getting restless. Saddam Hussein was captured nearly 2 ½ years ago. Yet the death toll continues to rise.
Showing good news might strengthen Americans for the journey. The nearest exit on this long road ahead is still beyond sight.
Insisting that good news is occurring is part of his rhetoric. It offers an optimistic view without actually showing substantial positive actions in Iraq.
The media is an easy scapegoat. Some Americans fret about a “liberal bias†in the news, and these are the people Bush is trying to convince.
That 36 percent includes conservatives.
But imagine if the mainstream press starts covering “good news†in Iraq.
Would that encourage the American public that this continuing war effort is worth the sacrifice?
No.
Bush’s goals never included building schools or providing clean drinking water.
His stated objective was to protect the United States.
His original reasoning for this war was to overthrow Saddam Hussein, whom he saw as a threat for his weapons of mass destruction and ties to al Qaeda.
Saddam is gone. There are no WMDs. There never were links to al Qaeda.
Americans have noticed.
In a March 21 press conference, the president insisted he wasn’t suggesting journalists shouldn’t talk about violence in Iraq.
As in, the bombings, kidnappings and beheadings that occur almost daily.
But during that same press conference, he told a reporter that “(Enemies) are capable of blowing up innocent life so it ends up on your TV show.â€
Perpetrators of violence may be a little more complex than that. But he hints at a phantom link between reporting only bad news from Iraq and aiding the enemy.
Planting a seed of doubt about the media’s objectivity may be an effective tool. But a simple lesson in journalism refutes it.
Journalists don’t exist to tell Americans what the president wants them to hear. Their job is to report the news.
Even the Wall Street Journal, a conservative daily, rarely covers positive happenings in Iraq as hard news stories.
Is the media guilty of a bias against good news?
Of course.
As the old adage goes, “If it bleeds, it leads.â€
No matter who is in the White House.
-30-