|
 lonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 11 years, 11 months
|
 Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. 
#4209842 - 05/23/05 12:05 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
http://www.insidebayarea.com/argus/news/ci_2750737
Iraq war coverage blurs U.S. casualties
By James Rainey, Los Angeles Times
The young soldier died like so many others, ambushed while on patrol in Baghdad, Iraq. Medics rushed him to a field hospital, but couldn't get his heart beating again.
What set Army Spc. Travis Babbitt's last moments in Iraq apart was that he confronted them in front of a journalist's camera.
An Associated Press photograph of the mortally wounded Babbitt remains a rarity ? one of a handful of pictures of dead or dying American service members to be printed in this country since the start of the Iraq war.
A review of six prominent U.S. newspapers and the nation's two most popular news magazines during a recent six-month period found almost no pictures from the war zone of Americans killed in action. During that time, 559 Americans and Western allies died. The same publications ran 44 photos from Iraq to represent the thousands of Westerners wounded during that same time.
Many photographers and editors believe they are delivering Americans a muted portrait of the violence that has killed
1,797 U.S. service members and their Western allies and wounded 12,516 Americans.
Journalists attribute the relatively bloodless portrayal of the war to a variety of causes ? some in their control, others in the hands of the U.S. military, and the most important related to the far-flung nature of the conflict and the way American news outlets perceive their role.
"We in the news business are not doing a very good job of showing our readers what has really happened over there," said Pim Van Hemmen, assistant managing editor for photography at the Star-Ledger of Newark, N.J.
"Writing in a headline that 1,500 Americans have died doesn't give you nearly the impact of showing one serviceman who is dead," Van Hemmen said. "It's the power of visuals."
Publishing such photos grabs readers' attention, but not always in ways that news executives like. When the Star-Ledger and several other papers ran the Babbitt photo in November, their editors were lashed by some readers ? who called them cruel, insensitive, even unpatriotic.
Deirdre Sargent, whose husband was deployed to Iraq, e-mailed editors of the News Tribune of Tacoma, Wash., that the photo left her "shaking and in tears for hours." "It was tacky, unprofessional and completely unnecessary," she added.
Babbitt's mother, Kathy Hernandez, expressed more ambivalent sentiments. "That is not an image you want to see like that," said Hernandez, still shedding tears of fury and sadness six months after her son's death. "Your kid is lying like that and there is no way you can get there to help them."
Hernandez ? who lives in Uvalde, Texas, about 80 miles west of San Antonio ? wishes the newspapers at least had waited until after her son's funeral to run the photo. But she has no doubt why they wanted to print it.
"I do think it's an important thing, for people to see what goes on over there," Hernandez said in a phone interview. "It throws reality more in your face. And sometimes we can't help reality."
In virtually every conflict since the beginning of the 20th century, the debate has been renewed: Do Americans need to see the most vivid pictures of the consequences of war?
One camp has argued against publishing graphic images of U.S. casualties, saying the pictures hurt morale, aid the enemy and intrude on the most intimate moments of human suffering.
Journalists, in contrast, generally have invoked their responsibility as witnesses ? believing they must provide an unsanitized portrait of combat.
"There can be horrible images, but war is horrible and we need to understand that," said Chris Hondros, a veteran war photographer whose pictures are distributed by the Getty Images agency. "I think if we are going to start a war, we ought to be willing to show the consequences of that war."
Among the most arresting images of the last three years: the charred bodies of American contractors hanging from a bridge in Fallujah, by Khalid Mohammed of Associated Press; the stoic face of an exhausted U.S. Marine, cigarette dangling from his lip, by Luis Sinco of the Los Angeles Times; the wrenching series of pictures of naked Iraqi prisoners being humiliated at the Abu Ghraib prison, taken by the prison guards; and Hondros' tableau of young, blood-stained Iraqi children whose parents mistakenly had been shot to death before their eyes.
So why have photographs of the American dead and wounded been so few and far between?
A wide array of photographers and editors agreed that the most significant reason was logistical.
With a relative handful of photographers at any time covering a nation the size of California, a probing camera is usually absent when a guerrilla attack erupts. Scenes of roadside bombings typically show only a burned-out armored vehicle.
On other occasions, photographers find themselves thwarted by their military handlers. In one case last summer, troops jumped in the way to block pictures of the dead and wounded being rushed to a hospital in Najaf.
Photojournalists sometimes withhold the most striking images from Iraq on their own.
When 22 people died just before Christmas in the bombing of a mess hall near Mosul, a Virginia newspaper photographer was closest to the action. Thrown to the ground amid dead and dying servicemen, he sent many images that ran around the world. But he believed the photos of a soldier who died by his side were too personal, and perhaps too gruesome, to transmit home.
A complex machinery sifts out many other images before they reach print. Photographers embedded with the U.S. military agree not to use photos that show the dead or wounded if faces can be recognized. A rule requiring notification of family members means that some photos are held for so long that they lose their immediate news value. In other cases, stateside photo editors rule pictures too graphic for publication.
None of those decisions goes without scrutiny in a war that has been politically charged since its inception. The Pentagon banned photographs of flag-draped coffins being delivered to the United States, arguing it was a necessity to protect the privacy of the dead and their families. But war critics said the military imposed the ban (lifted partially with the release of some of the military's own casket photographs) to obscure the costs of combat.
Veteran photographer Paul Fusco ? a liberal whose pictures of soldiers' funerals appeared early this year in Mother Jones magazine ? said he was convinced that controls on war coverage came "straight from the White House" and helped prop up support for an unjustified war.
By contrast, a handful of conservative Internet commentators hammered the Pulitzer Prize awarded to Associated Press in April. They said the wire service's 20 winning photos for breaking news (including the shot of the 24-year-old Babbitt) bucked up the insurgents and failed to show U.S. troops looking heroic or helpful. The pictures, said a blog called Riding Sun, "portray the American invasion and occupation of Iraq as an unmitigated disaster."
To measure how American publications have depicted the war in pictures, the Los Angeles Times reviewed six months of coverage from Iraq. The period from Sept. 1 of last year until Feb. 28 of this year included the U.S. assault on Fallujah and the escalating insurgent attacks before January's election.
Despite the considerable bloodshed during that half-year, readers of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Los Angeles Times, New York Times, St. Louis Post-Dispatch and Washington Post did not see a single picture of a dead serviceman. The Seattle Times ran a photo three days before Christmas of the covered body of a soldier killed in the mess hall bombing. Neither Time nor Newsweek, the weekly newsmagazines, showed any U.S. battlefield dead during that time.
The New York Times and Los Angeles Times printed the most shots of wounded in the war zone during that time ? with 10 each, an average of one every 2 1/2 weeks. The other six publications ran a total of 24 pictures of American wounded.
"I feel we still aren't seeing the kind of pictures we need to see to tell the American people about this war and the costs of the war," said Steve Stroud, deputy director of photography at the Los Angeles Times.
Fred Nelson, a photo editor at the Seattle Times, said his newspaper ran graphic photos when necessary to convey the gravity of losses on either side.
"But our readers are incredibly intelligent," Nelson added. "And I think they can figure it out without us sticking a photo of a bloody body in their face every time it happens."
American television news also has delivered a relatively blood-free portrait, according to academics who have studied video imagery from the war. A George Washington University survey of nearly 2,000 TV news segments found that the war had been "sanitized" and rendered "free of bloodshed."
With relatively few pictures coming from the battlefield, American publications have used photos from the home front in an attempt to get the story across.
The Los Angeles Times and the newspapers in St. Louis and Atlanta, in particular, have focused on covering memorial services for soldiers and stories about grieving families.
On more than a dozen occasions, the Washington Post opened full pages inside the newspaper to print "Faces of the Fallen," with hundreds of portraits of those killed, while the New York Times packed similar images into a single edition when the U.S. death toll reached 1,000. Newsweek ran a large color spread on a tank soldier weeping over the death of a crewmate. And Time magazine this spring ran a six-page story with photos by perennial award-winner James Nachtwey, offering an unflinching view of amputees at military hospitals.
American publications typically have run substantially more photos of Iraqi blood spilled, including the New York Times with 55 photos of Iraqis dead or wounded over the six months surveyed, compared with its 10 photos of U.S. casualties. The Los Angeles Times ran 41 photos of Iraqi casualties and 10 of American wounded. The Washington Post ran 18 Iraqi casualty photos and six of U.S. wounded.
"War kills men, women and children, and we would be remiss if we couldn't in some way show that this is what happens in war," said Michele McNally, New York Times director of photography. "It's our responsibility to bear witness to these events."
Photographers and editors said pictures of Iraqi losses had been much more prevalent in large part because Iraqis had suffered many more casualties.
But there are other reasons. American editors have less fear that grieving friends and relatives half a world away will have see the traumatic photos. And Iraqi casualty photos can be transmitted without the "hold" restrictions ? for notification of family members ? that govern photos of American casualties.
When they do show images of casualties on the American side, newspaper executives can count on a backlash. Newark's Star-Ledger received about two dozen complaints when it ran the picture of Babbitt on its front page.
Complaints
to the News Tribune of Tacoma about the "insensitivity" of the photo prompted Executive Editor Dave Zeeck to write an explanatory essay on Page 2 of the main news section. Zeeck told readers that he believed the picture, taken by John Moore of Associated Press, epitomized the sacrifice of the American soldier.
"We not only have the right, but the responsibility to run such photos," Zeeck said.
Nearly 20 photographers who have worked in Iraq said in interviews that no factor limited pictures of the bloodshed more than the difficulty in getting to the news.
News organizations have invested millions of dollars in covering the war, but journalists form a thin, broken line when stretched across the vast deserts and mountains of Iraq. At any given time in recent months, from three to 13 photographers have been on assignment with the military, a U.S. Army official said. And those who remain "in country" find their movements increasingly limited by the violence.
"Compared to the pope's funeral or Martha Stewart or the Michael Jackson trial, there is nobody here," said Jim MacMillan, part of Associated Press's Pulitzer Prize-winning team of photographers in Iraq. Americans, he said, "are missing the war. The embedded perspective is going vastly undercovered, with some exceptions, and that is the only place you can cover the risk and the price being paid by Americans."
The conflict in Iraq has produced uncommon displays of bravery and skill from dozens of photographers; that's the consensus of correspondents who have been there and of those who have covered earlier conflicts.
But like journalists through history, today's war photographers endure long hours of boredom, punctuated by "crazy adrenaline for perhaps 20 minutes at a time," said Thomas Dworzak of Magnum Photos, another agency whose photos are distributed widely to the media.
In one six-week period, Dworzak said, the unit he was embedded with engaged in just two firefights and suffered two bomb attacks, while violent encounters went unrecorded minutes away.
Digital cameras and satellite communications make it possible to ship pictures from a foxhole at the front. No technological advance, however, can eliminate perhaps the photojournalist's most difficult assignment ? building camaraderie with soldiers while continuing to hold them objectively as subjects.
Many soldiers and officers in Iraq said they came to respect the cameramen and camerawomen who stood beside them through firefights and mortar barrages. But those relationships can fray quickly when things go wrong.
Tyler Hicks of the New York Times and Carolyn Cole of the Los Angeles Times accompanied the Army in August during the dangerous assault on the insurgent stronghold of Najaf. They weathered several life-threatening episodes with the troops. But much of the respect they gained disappeared when the two attempted to take pictures of wounded and dead soldiers being rushed to a field hospital.
Cole, a Pulitzer winner for photographs she took of the war in Liberia, said later she understood the soldiers' high emotions. But she resented the row of soldiers blocking her camera, who in her view prevented her from doing her job.
"They were happy to have us along when we could show them fighting the battle, show the courageous side of them. Then suddenly the tables turned," Cole said. "They didn't want anything shown of their grief and what was happening on the negative side, which is equally important."
Although they had not broken any written agreement, both photographers said their Army handlers made it clear they were no longer welcome. They transferred to a Marine unit. (The Army public affairs officer who oversaw the two did not respond to repeated requests for comment.)
Hondros, the Getty Images photographer, took pictures early this year that provoked a particularly strong reaction. They showed children in the terrifying moments after an Army patrol accidentally shot their parents to death.
Published in Newsweek and several newspapers, the pictures sparked discussion of the military's rules of engagement with civilian vehicles and provoked an outpouring of aid for the so-called "orphans of Tall Afar." They also resulted in Hondros being banned from any further work with the unit, part of the 25th Infantry Division.
Officers with the unit, which patrolled the town near the Syrian border, said they thought they had an understanding with the photographer that he would hold the pictures until they could investigate. Hondros said he had made no such agreement.
"The military does hold over your head the ultimate trump card that if you do something they don't like, they can boot you out," said Joe Raedle, another war photographer for Getty Images. "But for the most part, it doesn't keep you from doing your job."
Although a few photographers relentlessly blare the First Amendment clarion, most said they found themselves on the battlefield balancing a more nuanced set of values and emotions.
Dean Hoffmeyer of the Richmond (Va.) Times-Dispatch found out how confounding such calculations could become a few days before Christmas last year, when a suicide bomber attacked the military mess tent where he was waiting in line with dozens of soldiers.
Blasted to the ground, Hoffmeyer pulled himself off the ground and into the chaos of the deadliest attack of the war on any U.S. base. A young man bleeding to death beside him would be one of 22 to die that day.
Despite a broken lens, aperture wide open, Hoffmeyer fired off several frames of the mortally wounded soldier.
He continued taking pictures of the blast scene ? images that ran prominently in nearly every American paper in the days to come. But he never transmitted the pictures of the dying soldier.
Seeing them weeks later, his editor would describe them as "horrible pictures, wonderfully made."
The married, churchgoing Hoffmeyer has struggled with the decision ever since. He has gotten plenty of support from other photographers and taken hits from a few others, who suggested he left his best work in his camera.
Hoffmeyer thought the pictures of the soldier ? his hand pressed over a neck wound streaming with blood ? might be too graphic for publication. If the vivid shots had made the paper, they might have infuriated the Virginia National Guard battalion he had covered, and threatened his plan to catalog the unit's postwar lives. Finally, he thought how terrible it would be to see pictures like that if his own son, 9, found himself in a similar a position someday.
"I don't know if what I did was right," the 41-year-old onetime radio disc jockey said. "But it's what I felt was right."
Another photographer on the front line made the opposite decision, but the result for American newspaper readers was much the same.
Stefan Zaklin of European Pressphoto Agency transmitted the picture of a fallen U.S. Army captain during November's assault on Fallujah. It was apparently the only news picture to be printed of one of the dozens of service members who died in the battle.
The photo ran in Thailand's Bangkok Post, in Paris Match and on the front page of Germany's Bild-Zeitung, the highest-circulation newspaper in Europe.
The Village Voice in New York became the first American newspaper to print it this week, along with an essay in which Sydney H. Schanberg argued that the war could not be covered while "omitting anything important out of timidity or squeamishness."
MSNBC.com briefly had posted the shot in November, but took it down after complaints from the officer's family.
"At first we thought it was a really iconic photo of the terrible violence going on in Iraq," said Dean Wright, editor in chief of MSNBC.com. But when it appeared the soldier could be recognized, "We thought it was too horrific," he said, "because it was more personalized then."
Many American editors sound the same note as Jeff Schamberry, director of photography for Newsday, the Long Island, N.Y., daily.
"Our policy in general is not to use a picture with a body, a dead person ? unless there is a very compelling reason," Schamberry said.
That's a marked contrast from the attitude at many foreign publications, which tend to run more pictures of bloodshed, whether from the accident across town or a war across the world.
Scenes of the war's death and destruction appear routinely in Europe and Asia, according to several journalism analysts. But that coverage has limits. Editors of several English newspapers acknowledged, for instance, that they used pictures of British casualties sparingly.
Nonetheless, foreign news outlets depict more bloodshed, perhaps in part because their audiences have often had closer contact with war and seem less willing to accept sanitized coverage, one U.S. academic said.
"Americans have a view of war that comes out of World War II, that war is a sort of sacred national cause," said Daniel C. Hallin, a communications professor at the University of California, San Diego, who has conducted extensive reviews of television war coverage. "We are all supposed to unite around war ... because these great sacrifices are being made for freedom."
Even aggressive American photographers sometimes become resigned to the notion that the public might not see their work.
"These pictures are going unseen because editors don't print them," said Hondros. "And they don't print them because readers don't want to see them."
But there is some evidence that the public holds a more ambivalent view.
A survey on behalf of Associated Press managing editors questioned 2,461 regular newspaper readers about a series of photos, including the image of the mortally wounded Babbitt.
In the unscientific survey, 59 percent of the readers said they would have published the Babbitt photo.
"This doesn't tell me we shouldn't be there," reader Rose Barnett of Jacksonville, Fla., said of the photo. "This tells me that this was a brave and kind man to lay his life down for the freedom of others. God rest his soul."
--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"
We have "reckless fiscal policies"
America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.
Americans deserve better
Barack Obama
Edited by lonestar2004 (05/23/05 12:29 PM)
|
 Silversoul
Rhizome
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: lonestar2004]
#4210230 - 05/23/05 01:39 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Whatever people's reaction to it, they need to see the realities of war.
--------------------
|
vampirism
Stranger
Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 8,120
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Silversoul]
#4210337 - 05/23/05 02:06 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
*Especially* America- their only connection to war is photographs; the war might just as well be going on a million miles away for all Americans care. I say this because mostly everywhere else has physical signs of the horrors of war, but here?
|
lonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 11 years, 11 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Silversoul]
#4210411 - 05/23/05 02:24 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
yes we need to see the realities of war. but not just dead American soldiers. show the reality of a innocent civilian reporter having his head slowing cut off and some dudes in the background singing
Praise Be Allah.
Praise Be Allah.
praise Be Allah.
--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"
We have "reckless fiscal policies"
America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.
Americans deserve better
Barack Obama
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: lonestar2004]
#4210659 - 05/23/05 03:23 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Will somebody please post a picture of the towers burning for me. Just so people can see the reality of war.
--------------------
|
vampirism
Stranger
Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 8,120
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: zappaisgod]
#4210687 - 05/23/05 03:29 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
it was terrible, but not war.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: vampirism]
#4210820 - 05/23/05 04:09 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
How often do you have to hear them declare war on America before you catch on? It only takes one side to declare war. If you don't think so you're crazy. 
--------------------
|
Silversoul
Rhizome
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: zappaisgod]
#4210840 - 05/23/05 04:13 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Will somebody please post a picture of the towers burning for me. Just so people can see the reality of war.
The media showed plenty of that already.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Silversoul]
#4210994 - 05/23/05 04:54 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Apparently not enough recently
--------------------
|
Silversoul
Rhizome
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: zappaisgod]
#4211025 - 05/23/05 05:01 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
What makes you say that?
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: vampirism]
#4211202 - 05/23/05 05:41 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Morrowind said:
it was terrible, but not war.
--------------------
|
Silversoul
Rhizome
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: zappaisgod]
#4211215 - 05/23/05 05:43 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
By the government's own words, it was an act of terrorism, not war. The people who did it might have called it war, but according to the government, it's terrorism.
--------------------
|
Prosgeopax
Jaded, yethopeful?
Registered: 01/28/05
Posts: 1,258
Loc: Appearing at a mall near ...
Last seen: 17 years, 2 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: zappaisgod]
#4211219 - 05/23/05 05:44 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Will somebody please post a picture of the towers burning for me. Just so people can see the reality of war.
I will, if you will provide proof that Iraq was responsible.
--------------------
Money doesn't grow on trees, but deficits do grow under Bushes.
You can accept, reject, or examine and test any new idea that comes to you. The wise man chooses the third way.
- Tom Willhite
Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinions should I become aware of additional facts, the falsification of information or different perspectives. Articles written by others which I post may not necessarily reflect my opinions in part or in whole, my opinions may be in direct opposition, the topic may be one on which I have yet to formulate an opinion or have doubts about, an article may be posted solely with the intent to stimulate discussion or contemplation.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: zappaisgod]
#4211247 - 05/23/05 05:53 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
How often do you have to hear them declare war on America before you catch on? It only takes one side to declare war. If you don't think so you're crazy.
I'll take them at their word.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Prosgeopax]
#4211251 - 05/23/05 05:55 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prosgeopax said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Will somebody please post a picture of the towers burning for me. Just so people can see the reality of war.
I will, if you will provide proof that Iraq was responsible.
Not relevant.
--------------------
|
Prosgeopax
Jaded, yethopeful?
Registered: 01/28/05
Posts: 1,258
Loc: Appearing at a mall near ...
Last seen: 17 years, 2 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: zappaisgod]
#4211262 - 05/23/05 05:59 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Then why did you bring it up?
--------------------
Money doesn't grow on trees, but deficits do grow under Bushes.
You can accept, reject, or examine and test any new idea that comes to you. The wise man chooses the third way.
- Tom Willhite
Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinions should I become aware of additional facts, the falsification of information or different perspectives. Articles written by others which I post may not necessarily reflect my opinions in part or in whole, my opinions may be in direct opposition, the topic may be one on which I have yet to formulate an opinion or have doubts about, an article may be posted solely with the intent to stimulate discussion or contemplation.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Prosgeopax]
#4211306 - 05/23/05 06:14 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I never mentioned Iraq
--------------------
|
Silversoul
Rhizome
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: zappaisgod]
#4211319 - 05/23/05 06:17 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
I never mentioned Iraq
Yet this thread was about Iraq. Why'd you change the subject?
--------------------
|
Prosgeopax
Jaded, yethopeful?
Registered: 01/28/05
Posts: 1,258
Loc: Appearing at a mall near ...
Last seen: 17 years, 2 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: zappaisgod]
#4211329 - 05/23/05 06:20 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Yes I know, the article was talking about the dead from the Iraq war. Why did you bring up 'the towers?'
--------------------
Money doesn't grow on trees, but deficits do grow under Bushes.
You can accept, reject, or examine and test any new idea that comes to you. The wise man chooses the third way.
- Tom Willhite
Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinions should I become aware of additional facts, the falsification of information or different perspectives. Articles written by others which I post may not necessarily reflect my opinions in part or in whole, my opinions may be in direct opposition, the topic may be one on which I have yet to formulate an opinion or have doubts about, an article may be posted solely with the intent to stimulate discussion or contemplation.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Prosgeopax]
#4211357 - 05/23/05 06:29 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
War is war. I personally think that we are at war with Islamic nut cases and those who harbor them. I think Afghanistan qualified on both counts and Iraqi government on one count, but with the added beauty that they didn't seem capable of staying within their own borders. Maybe we should ask for more photos of the Kuwait devastation to enhance your memories. After all, you were only 10 years old then. Maybe not quite aware of the world as you are now.
I never forget.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Silversoul]
#4211367 - 05/23/05 06:31 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Paradigm said:
Whatever people's reaction to it, they need to see the realities of war.
Don't see Iraq in this post. And I agree. You want reality? Take all of it. You don't get to choose your reality.
--------------------
|
newuser1492
Registered: 06/12/03
Posts: 3,104
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: zappaisgod]
#4211399 - 05/23/05 06:39 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
First sentence.
Quote:
Iraq war coverage blurs U.S. casualties
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Prosgeopax]
#4211412 - 05/23/05 06:44 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Um, well, cuz, you know; the reason we spent $400,000,000,000 and Saddam and The Patriotic Acts I, II and II and all - you know... freedom, democracy, and fueling the religious divide.
--------------------
The proof is in the pudding.
|
Prosgeopax
Jaded, yethopeful?
Registered: 01/28/05
Posts: 1,258
Loc: Appearing at a mall near ...
Last seen: 17 years, 2 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: zappaisgod]
#4211726 - 05/23/05 08:14 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
War is war.
"I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace."
?George W. Bush, June 18, 2002
Quote:
I personally think that we are at war with Islamic nut cases and those who harbor them.
Hmm, is that why 'we' attacked the most secular regime in the region?
Quote:
After all, you were only 10 years old then.
Really? In what year was I born? While your at it, how old are my parents, how old are my dogs, and how many fingers am I holding up?
Quote:
I never forget.
That's good because I seem to have misplaced my facts, perhaps you would like to refresh my memory and reply to the following:
1) How many ICBMs did Iraq have?
2) What was the range of their ICBMS?
3) What type of payloads were these missiles capable of delivering to the U.S.?
4) Please briefly describe the types of nuclear weapons that Iraq possessed.
5) Please describe the long range bombers Iraq had that were capable of reaching the U.S.
6) Please provide a summary of Iraq's naval capabilities including submarines, aircraft carriers and landing craft capable of reaching the U.S.
7) Was Iraq contained? (this is a simple one, yes or no)
8) Please explain the benefits to the U.S. TAXPAYERS of the expenditures of Bush's war in Iraq.
9) Please explain the benefits of burdening future generations with debt.
10) Please provide evidence that Iraq was responsible for terrorist attacks on U.S. soil.
11) Please provide evidence that those U.S. soldiers who have died in Iraq did so thwarting aggression against U.S. citizens at home.
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
You want reality? Take all of it. You don't get to choose your reality.
--------------------
Money doesn't grow on trees, but deficits do grow under Bushes.
You can accept, reject, or examine and test any new idea that comes to you. The wise man chooses the third way.
- Tom Willhite
Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinions should I become aware of additional facts, the falsification of information or different perspectives. Articles written by others which I post may not necessarily reflect my opinions in part or in whole, my opinions may be in direct opposition, the topic may be one on which I have yet to formulate an opinion or have doubts about, an article may be posted solely with the intent to stimulate discussion or contemplation.
|
StrandedVoyager
The People's Champ
Registered: 12/09/04
Posts: 3,236
Loc: (202)-456-1414 Call Me
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Prosgeopax]
#4211973 - 05/23/05 09:05 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
There's a war on? I was too busy following American Idol. 
--------------------
Hi 
My god... it's full of stars...
|
Learyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 33,584
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: zappaisgod]
#4212248 - 05/23/05 09:58 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Maybe we should ask for more photos of the Kuwait devastation to enhance your memories.
I love how you guys always use that. As if you really care about the Kuwaiti people. No offense, but I know that if tomorrow Bush said he was going to nuke the whole middle east, you guys would be all for it.
--------------------
--------------------------------
Mp3 of the month: Dennis & The Times - Flight Patterns
Edited by Learyfan (05/23/05 10:00 PM)
|
SoopaX
Criminal DrugAnalyst
Registered: 11/12/04
Posts: 1,690
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Learyfan]
#4212729 - 05/24/05 12:03 AM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
newsweek could do a cover of the 19 dead in Afghanistan after their bullshit story ran.... lots of good gory pictures. Somehow, I don't think we'll see that.
--------------------
Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women, man
|
Photoguy
Drunk andJobless
Registered: 02/24/05
Posts: 553
Loc: Drunk in Texas
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: SoopaX]
#4216026 - 05/24/05 07:53 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
You know what makes me pull my fucking hair out?
THE FACT I AM NOT FUCKING OVER THERE RIGHT FUCKING NOW.
Every fucking newspaper in the country has slashed there staff 15-40% in the past two years. I can not tell you how many times I have interviewed and been denied because I dont have my college degree yet.
ARGH! I want to be over there right now. RIGHT NOW. I would take photos like the world has not seen before.
I can string all I want, but you have to be on staff 6+ years to get an oversea's deployment. ARGH!
My friend David Leeson.
http://www.pulitzer.org/year/2004/breaking-news-photography/works/
I would give my life to get that one shot, ya know the one that changes politics.
--------------------
You gotta check yo' self before you wreck yo' self
B, Z, F, Burma, Cambodian, Golden Teacher, Puerto Rico, South American, Costa Rica, African
My name is Ender Wiggen and I will own you soon. Bean is my second in command, he is PC'ing jars right now.
|
RandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Photoguy]
#4217547 - 05/25/05 06:06 AM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
You could go over there as a free-lance person.
|
Photoguy
Drunk andJobless
Registered: 02/24/05
Posts: 553
Loc: Drunk in Texas
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: RandalFlagg]
#4219284 - 05/25/05 04:47 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
$19,521.00
That is how much it would cost for me to be over there for 3 weeks.
This includes air fair, lodging, security, guide, as well as 5.000 for emergency funds IE bribes and such.
BUT--I will have no military liaison, and with out that, im pretty much shit out of luck. To get into or out of any areas you must have military permission. And as a freelancer with no finical backing, i can't get that yet.
So I will keep trying to get on with an agency and then go shoot.
--------------------
You gotta check yo' self before you wreck yo' self
B, Z, F, Burma, Cambodian, Golden Teacher, Puerto Rico, South American, Costa Rica, African
My name is Ender Wiggen and I will own you soon. Bean is my second in command, he is PC'ing jars right now.
|
Le_Canard
The Duk Abides
Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 94,392
Loc: Earthfarm 1 
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: lonestar2004]
#4219641 - 05/25/05 06:24 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I don't know. Regardless of how you feel about the Iraq mess and war in general, I think those closest to the dead soldiers should have the most consideration in this sort of thing. I mean, how would you feel about seeing a picture your father/mother, sister/brother etc. mortally wounded?
|
Photoguy
Drunk andJobless
Registered: 02/24/05
Posts: 553
Loc: Drunk in Texas
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Le_Canard]
#4222293 - 05/26/05 11:43 AM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
In general, i believe those parents/brothers/sisters want the pictures shown. They want the world to see the cost, see whats actually going on.
I have to do research on this kind of thing for different projects, and actually talk to people who have lost loved ones. I would say 90% say to publish photos even if a loved one is in the photograph.
I believe that this has to do with the whole healing process. They want the world to see the nightmares of war, maybe so it will change the views.
I would go further to say almost 100% of minorities in the army want photographs published. With the majority of the army composed of minorities, they feel both patriotic and honor bound to show the dead. They want this to be a reminder of their sacrifice.
You would not believe what journalists have to go through now, with ethics and morality training. We are battling an politically correct machine right now and losing the battle. More and more stories and pictures are sanitized from fear of political and finical threats.
Few media intuitions in the united states still publish with no thought to political reprisal. Less than 6-10 that I can think of, and none of those are major papers or magazines anyways.
--------------------
You gotta check yo' self before you wreck yo' self
B, Z, F, Burma, Cambodian, Golden Teacher, Puerto Rico, South American, Costa Rica, African
My name is Ender Wiggen and I will own you soon. Bean is my second in command, he is PC'ing jars right now.
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 8 years, 2 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Photoguy]
#4222783 - 05/26/05 01:48 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
The majority of the US army is composed of minorities? Source, please.
"Political reprisal"? Such as? Please point out to us the last time a newspaper, radio station, or newsmagazine in the US was closed down by the US government. All the MSM in the US are relentlessly anti-Bush and print whatever they damn well please.
Phred
--------------------
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,814
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Phred]
#4222811 - 05/26/05 01:56 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
All the MSM in the US are relentlessly anti-Bush
So you don't consider FOX, for example, to be MSM?
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
RandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Photoguy]
#4222846 - 05/26/05 02:04 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Photoguy said:
With the majority of the army composed of minorities
Where did you get that factoid? It is wrong by the way. Here is the proof:
http://www.racematters.org/whichmansarmy.htm
according to Defense Department Data
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-01-20-army-race-usat-_x.htm
But a close examination of Pentagon statistics suggests that at least some of the conventional wisdom about who is most at risk during wartime is misleading. For example, although blacks account for 26% of Army troops, they make up a much smaller percentage of those in front-line combat units, the most likely to be killed or injured in a conventional war.
Edited by RandalFlagg (05/26/05 02:08 PM)
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 8 years, 2 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: trendal]
#4222865 - 05/26/05 02:12 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Fox is a single cable channel. One. Uno.
I was referring to the NY Times, the LA Times, the Boston Globe, the Washington Post, AP, al- Reuters, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR, PBS, Time, Newsweek, the Minnesota Star Tribune, Seattle Times (or is it Chronicle?)....
Phred
--------------------
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,814
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Phred]
#4222894 - 05/26/05 02:17 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Fox is a single cable channel. One. Uno.
Really?
I was under the impression that FOX also owns a large assortment of "local" stations accross the country.
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
SoopaX
Criminal DrugAnalyst
Registered: 11/12/04
Posts: 1,690
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Photoguy]
#4222907 - 05/26/05 02:19 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Dude, most poeple don't want their dead kids shown to further your political agenda. Pull your freakin head out.
--------------------
Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women, man
|
Prosgeopax
Jaded, yethopeful?
Registered: 01/28/05
Posts: 1,258
Loc: Appearing at a mall near ...
Last seen: 17 years, 2 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: SoopaX]
#4222936 - 05/26/05 02:26 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
You're right, it's bad enough they have already died for someone else's political agenda.
--------------------
Money doesn't grow on trees, but deficits do grow under Bushes.
You can accept, reject, or examine and test any new idea that comes to you. The wise man chooses the third way.
- Tom Willhite
Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinions should I become aware of additional facts, the falsification of information or different perspectives. Articles written by others which I post may not necessarily reflect my opinions in part or in whole, my opinions may be in direct opposition, the topic may be one on which I have yet to formulate an opinion or have doubts about, an article may be posted solely with the intent to stimulate discussion or contemplation.
|
SoopaX
Criminal DrugAnalyst
Registered: 11/12/04
Posts: 1,690
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Prosgeopax]
#4222965 - 05/26/05 02:30 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Why did, and does always, the military vote for the Republican canditate?
--------------------
Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women, man
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 8 years, 2 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: trendal]
#4222975 - 05/26/05 02:32 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
What's your point, trendal?
FOX NEWS programming is identical no matter which affiliate airs it. The O'Reilly factor is the same in Dubuque as it is in Albuquerque.
I'm not talking about Fox general programming where we get to see The Simpsons and King of the Hill and That 70's Show. I'm talking about FOX NEWS.
By the way, when I visit my family in Ottawa, I watch the Fox station (channel 36) all the time for shows like the above. It's not a Canadian Fox station, it's an American one (upstate New York). They don't show news. That is restricted to their CABLE operation. That's why I have never seen Bill O'Reilly or Hannity and Colmes or Ann Coulter.
Phred
--------------------
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,814
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Phred]
#4223016 - 05/26/05 02:40 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
What's your point, trendal?
You said:
"All the MSM in the US are relentlessly anti-Bush"
I was disagreeing with that, as obviously FOX News is not anti-Bush (more like pro-Bush) but is also a mainstream news-outlet.
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
Le_Canard
The Duk Abides
Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 94,392
Loc: Earthfarm 1
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Photoguy]
#4223038 - 05/26/05 02:45 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Photoguy said:
In general, i believe those parents/brothers/sisters want the pictures shown. They want the world to see the cost, see whats actually going on.
I have to do research on this kind of thing for different projects, and actually talk to people who have lost loved ones. I would say 90% say to publish photos even if a loved one is in the photograph.
Er.. I'm curious - how many have you actually spoken with?
Quote:
I believe that this has to do with the whole healing process. They want the world to see the nightmares of war, maybe so it will change the views.
There are plenty of pictures depicting the horrors of war from previous conflicts. They have changed nothing....
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 8 years, 2 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: trendal]
#4223040 - 05/26/05 02:46 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Well whaddya know. I did use the word "all". You were right, I was wrong. My bad.
From here on in I will have to qualify statements of that kind to read "All the MSM with the single exception of FOX News".
Phred
--------------------
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,814
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Phred]
#4223048 - 05/26/05 02:49 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I would have accepted that, yes.
Or, much better, "Most of the MSM are anti-Bush". 
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: trendal]
#4223896 - 05/26/05 06:47 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
"Most" is probably a little too soft. It just means more than half. "Almost all" is probably the most accurate.
--------------------
|
Prosgeopax
Jaded, yethopeful?
Registered: 01/28/05
Posts: 1,258
Loc: Appearing at a mall near ...
Last seen: 17 years, 2 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: SoopaX]
#4223969 - 05/26/05 07:11 PM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SoopaX said:
Why did, and does always, the military vote for the Republican canditate?
Did and does always? By military, do you mean all military personnel or always some military personnel? Care to offer any supporting evidence for your assertion? I am willing to wager that you cannot. I would suspect that going back any appreciable time in history (say back to before WWI), you would find a variance in voting patterns among military personnel that would show that even a majority of them were not always politically disposed to voting Republican. Have you heard of FDR? I know military personnel who voted with the Constitution Party and/or Libertarian Party in the last election and avoided both major parties so I know they don't all support the current regime. You should also keep in mind that soldiers cannot publicly criticize their commander in chief lest they be subject to discipline. This alone would serve to quell the voicing of negative opinions in public.
--------------------
Money doesn't grow on trees, but deficits do grow under Bushes.
You can accept, reject, or examine and test any new idea that comes to you. The wise man chooses the third way.
- Tom Willhite
Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinions should I become aware of additional facts, the falsification of information or different perspectives. Articles written by others which I post may not necessarily reflect my opinions in part or in whole, my opinions may be in direct opposition, the topic may be one on which I have yet to formulate an opinion or have doubts about, an article may be posted solely with the intent to stimulate discussion or contemplation.
|
Photoguy
Drunk andJobless
Registered: 02/24/05
Posts: 553
Loc: Drunk in Texas
Last seen: 17 years, 3 months
|
Re: Media wants more photos of dead Soldiers. [Re: Prosgeopax]
#4225269 - 05/27/05 01:56 AM (17 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Sorry about the minority majority remark, although the number is said to be around hovering around 39% right now. My numbers also took into account women as being a minority, which pushed the number to around 57% of the army composed of women, black, hispanic or other.
The military does generally vote for the commander in chief, its in-grained in them.
Im working on my masters in journalism with a concentration on photojournalism. I have a degree in political science and photojournalism--(starting next month thank god)
My background is interviewing people, it is talking to the mothers and fathers, asking them questions. I am honestly telling you they want the photographs to be published. I am currently HEAVILY involved with a newspaper orginization that is in the top 10 most popular/heavily read in the country. I deal with this issue on a daily basis.
Please pull your heads from the sand if you think that the limit of blood and gore today both in the media and the culture is anything less than an sanatization process the u.s. government is successfly doing at this period in our lives.
--------------------
You gotta check yo' self before you wreck yo' self
B, Z, F, Burma, Cambodian, Golden Teacher, Puerto Rico, South American, Costa Rica, African
My name is Ender Wiggen and I will own you soon. Bean is my second in command, he is PC'ing jars right now.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Red Vein Kratom 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 all )
Zahid
dee_N_ae
ricyjo
Learyfan
carbonhoots