As long term readers have no doubt noticed, I follow the DOD press transcripts on a regular basis. Through the wonders of 21st Century technology I can be virtually present at all the DOD press briefings and media appearances.
One of the stories I have been following for the last few months is the arrangement between media and military for coverage of the coming end of Saddam. You may not know it, but there are going to be reporters and even TV crews embedded with virtually every unit from the first wave front line troops to the division headquarters forces.
The DOD has decided the best way to fight back against the expected disinformation campaign Saddam will wage is to have reporters right in the face of the battle and in literally every corner of it. Perhaps not embedded with special forces, but certainly almost everywhere else. We are going to get battles live on TV this time around. I also suspect we are going to see more dead journalists than usual given their location in the thick of it.
The reporting will be more open than in previous wars but with critical restrictions on the release of information which would compromise a mission, or the showing or naming of dead and maimed soldiers before families have been notified. I can’t imagine any decent human being not understanding the latter. As to the former, if a reporter gives away operational information on their unit their own arse is on the line.
It seems like a good plan to me. We’ll get a perspective never before seen outside of the front line. The military gets a lot of protection against what Saddam is going to try to pull off 1. The media get a freer reign than they have had in decades and must only follow rules which would require either stupidity or inhumanity to violate.
There have been many briefings on this topic, but you may find this NPR discussion a good introduction to the pro’s and con’s. While you are reading, note the comments of the New York Times correspondent.
He’s everything you’d expect from them.
1 =There have been recent reports some elite Iraqi troops have been issued uniforms made to look exactly like the american ones and have been ordered to commit atrocities to stir up trouble. The troops in question are the same ones who have been responsible for beheading women in public places and who are seen in TV footage with faces covered in white masks. There are also reports explosives have been purchased, wells mined and that some oil wells have already been blown up. Trenches of fuel oil for smoke barriers have been filled and tested. Saddam might also order the intentional release of millions of gallons of crude per day into the Persian Gulf in an attempt to destroy the water desalinization plants and water tables of Kuwait and other water poor Arab countries.
From what I have read, journalists at places like AP, the BBC, Reuters and CNN have been on courses to learn about how to operate alongside or near the military.
People tend to forget, amid much of the righteous criticism directed at the likes of the BBC for its biased reporting, that most hacks are brave folk who do this sort of thing in dangerous circumstances. The rollcall of reporters who died in the course of the job, including Danny Pearl, of course, is long and depressing.
It’s alway been my opinion that military and press can be symbiotic, with a little good faith from both. We’re all on the same team, and in the thick of it people tend to remember that. I’m all for this. God forbid though, I hope we don’t have many press casualties.
— brendan
obtw – salam pax has seen the smoke and oil trenches firsthand
Yes, I was referring to that very article via Instapundit.
I’ve been hearing the report about Iraq purchasing identical uniforms since yesterday as well, but I would like to know WHO they are purchasing the uniforms from, China?
Journalists have had to go through a sort of boot camp. Hopefully they can look out for themselves and not get in the way if or when there is actual combat.
I heard a report the other day that Saddam essentially threatened Chirac that he will divulge something to the French people SHOULD Chirac go along with the US, GB and Spain. I haven’t seen a report in writing. Anyone have a link?
We’re all on the same team
*cough*not*cough. The US mainstream media long ago traded in the search for objective truth for subtle manipulations in support of their socio-communist agenda. They’re hardly on the same team as the US Military. However, they have recently come to value highly profitable sensationalist entertainment too, which is probably the real reason for their interest in sending hacks with the troops.
It certainly didn’t take the NYT’s Hedges very long to display his agenda. However, the most pertinent of his comments relative to real time press coverage of wartime operations is his mention of the Iraqi attack into Ras al Khafji (or Hafji, as it is transcripted) as a failure of the Saudi’s to be able to defend their territory.
I remember watching my TV most avidly as the balloon went up with the air attacks on Iraq. That first night the “scud stud” (I can’t recall his real name) was breathlessly reporting for CBS from just south Al Khafji where the Saudi national guard was departing al Khafji for positions further to the south. I can almost see it click in Baghdad—“The Saudis have abandoned Ras al Khafji???? Let’s take it!!!”
The Scud Stud, under the guise of “reporting”, was giving our enemies operational intelligence as to our alliance’s military dispositions. If you are not a reporter, that might be construed as treasonous behavior.
Why should one wonder why the military is so charry about the behavior of our press reporters. News is news and a scoop is a scoop. Devil take the hindmost.
It certainly didn’t take the NYT’s Hedges very long to display his agenda. However, the most pertinent of his comments relative to real time press coverage of wartime operations is his mention of the Iraqi attack into Ras al Khafji (or Hafji, as it is transcripted) as a failure of the Saudi’s to be able to defend their territory.
I remember watching my TV most avidly as the balloon went up with the air attacks on Iraq. That first night the “scud stud” (I can’t recall his real name) was breathlessly reporting for CBS from just south Al Khafji where the Saudi national guard was departing al Khafji for positions further to the south. I can almost see it click in Baghdad—“The Saudis have abandoned Ras al Khafji???? Let’s take it!!!”
The Scud Stud, under the guise of “reporting”, was giving our enemies operational intelligence as to our alliance’s military dispositions. If you are not a reporter, that might be construed as treasonous behavior.
Why should one wonder why the military is so charry about the behavior of our press reporters. News is news and a scoop is a scoop. Devil take the hindmost.
Byron, yeah, to a degree, you’re right. But put someone into the front line action with you, and I suspect the teams realign real quick.
I think the biggest warm fuzzy I get from this sort of thing is not so much from being on the same team, but that both sides (military and press) are working together to more effectively exploit each other. Free market rules say this will be a positive, symbiotic, effective system if this is all true.
I was awful disapointed though, I must say, when FOX UN WEAPONS INSPECTORS never aired (bad boys! bad boys! whatchyagonnado…)
— Brendan
George is referring to Arthur Kent, Canadian reporter otherwise known as Scud Stud during the first Gulf War. He made war watching easier back then for the ladies.
The most distasteful journalism, in my opinion, were the hounds with microphones on the beach awaiting the American soldiers as they arrived in Somalia.
But put someone into the front line action with you, and I suspect the teams realign real quick.
That’s assuming the corporate media masters don’t see the field reporters as expendable pawns, and are using their career ambition against them. But I agree that if any of the field reporters get to do more than just record and actually get to voice their perceptions, they’ll most likely be complimentary to the soldiers and Marines they’re with.
And I do think it is a good idea for the military as well, given Saddam’s intentions to manipulate media perception of the war.
My worry is that individual units will have no choice as to which hacks go with them. Would you want Fiskie or Pilger with you?
(Scene: twilight, Iraqi desert. Suddenly a bepectacled loon minces theatrically onto an exposed ridgeline, waving and screeching):
“Over here, lovies! I’m with the western military-imperial fascists. Please shoot me, I’ll understand.”