« Tracking "Easongate" | Main | BBC's Sambrook chimes in »

February 06, 2005


Chris Josephson

Thanks for taking the time to help educate the non-journalists about why (or not) a story may be reported.


I find it interesting that Jordan appears to be concerned about his journalists (see his behavior covering for Saddam in the 1990s), and that this transcends his dedication to having a credible news organization. I'm assuming that Jordan did not ask the soldier in Baghdad his reasoning for sending the journalist to the back of the line...could it be that the journo did not have the appropriate documentation? I don't know, but I don't know of too many soldiers on guard duty that are that picky. You either have the creds or you don't.

I got an interesting insight into journalists when a reporter from a major wire service recently back form Iraq stated quite clearly to a military audience that she was "not on our side" - she emphasized that multiple times. So who's side are they on? The truth? The news? Their own? If the journos are aiding and abetting murder (see AP in Mosul), then does that make them enemy combatants? Remember, the United States is at war - this is not ambulance chasing local news. Journalists are getting bounced out of Iraq fairly often for not abiding by the agreements they signed to gain entry. Is there a mechanism (other than expulsion) to bring greater rigor to the quality of journalists work? There is also growing anti-journalist sentiment downrange for the failure of journalists to report on the good work that is being done in Iraq and Afghanistan, and this is percieved as supporting the insurgents, or at least providing them free press while providing biased coverage to the audience. I can easily find this work being addressed in press briefings and public affairs announcements, but they rarely seem to make it into copy. Did Jordan address this issue?


Your responses read reasonable -- but the way they are placed in Mr. Hewitt's blog are not


"the extent of ill-will and hostility that exists between some soldiers and some journalists"

This certainly seems to exist, and from what I have seen is mostly the fault of the journalists. That would not excuse the behaviour of the soldier if it was as reported, which I would doubt without hard evidence.

Mike H.

A man who would let his court martial accompany him to the field is an idiot.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Global Voices

  • Global Voices Online - The world is talking. Are you listening?

  • Donate to Global Voices - Help us spread the word
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 10/2004


My book:

Consent of the Networked
Coming January 31st, 2012, from Basic Books. To pre-order click here.
AddThis Feed Button