How About Doing Your Job?

July 12th, 2007
By Michael van der Galien


Jules Crittenden has a good post up, in which he wonders why the different media are not offering “an actual, meaningful, in-depth look at the execution of the counter-insurgency strategy in Iraq by someone who has taken the time to understand what its goals and methods are, and isn’t just interested in kicking the crap out of it from a distance.” Jules looked at the AP, at the NYT, at the WaPo, at other major newspapers / organizations who have made quite some ‘in-depth series’ recently, but none of them offers what Jules wants to read - and I agree with Jules that it is incredibly important for media to look at it.

It may be that some other prominent newspapers, the LA Times, the Chicago Trib, are doing it. If so, it hasn’t come my way and I’m sorry, but I don’t have the time to scroll through all of them. I can assure you the Boston Globe isn’t doing it. They pulled out of Baghdad years ago and have now shuttered all their foreign bureaus. My own paper has never had the resources to do more than parachute into foreign trouble spots for a couple of weeks or a couple of months at a time, and these days, we aren’t doing that any more. That may well be true of your local newspaper, too. Which makes the work of organizations like the Associated Press, the New York Times and the Washington Post that much more important.

So please let me know if you find it: An actual, meaningful, in-depth look at the execution of the counter-insurgency strategy in Iraq by someone who has taken the time to understand what its goals and methods are, and isn’t just interested in kicking the crap out of it from a distance. An effort to understand and report fairly on what may be the last chance to prevent a bloody humanitarian disaster on a scale not seen since Cambodia, quick, before the opportunity is thrown away.

I was going to wrap this rant up right there, but I read back over it and still can’t believe it. It is absolutely stunning in its absence. A screaming vacuum. I wonder how it is this possible.

Do not just let Jules know, if you find it - let me know as well. I would be more than interested in reading it and sharing it with you all. We get the bad news, what about the strategy used? How does it work? What should we focus on? What are the main goals and where? Etc., etc.

Lastly, Jules wonders:

So the question is, are these leading news organizations lazy, or stupid, or is it that they just don’t want to know?

I am not sure what the correct answer is, but I do know that they should do this. A screaming vacuum indeed.

In a way, this is related to the post I published earlier today about how the world will perceive a withdrawal from Iraq that will result in genocide. American media should report about this as well. It misses from most columns. I am a foreigner, and as such, I am surprised, greatly surprised, by the approach most American political analysts take.




This entry was posted on Thursday, July 12th, 2007 at 5:02 am and is filed under Media Criticism, Iraq, War. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Trackbacks

close Reblog this comment
blog comments powered by Disqus

Bailing Out »

By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.