Why War Reporters Get It So Wrong
Patrick Cockburn: It's a hard job when propaganda and bullets are flying
By Neal Colgrass, Newser Staff
Posted Oct 3, 2013 4:40 PM CDT
In this citizen journalism image provided by Shaam News Network SNN, taken on Tuesday, July 24, 2012, a Syrian citizen journalist documents Syrian forces shelling in Homs, Syria.   (AP Photo/Shaam News Network, SNN)

(Newser) – Journalists have given us the wrong impression about four Middle East wars since 9/11—but how did they blow it so badly? In the London Review of Books, Patrick Cockburn looks at how the media fumbled the ball in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. In each case, he argues, reporters portrayed Western involvement as humanitarian and over-emphasized its military successes. "More than most armed struggles, the conflicts have been propaganda wars in which newspaper, television and radio journalists played a central role," he writes. But why?

  • "Irregular or guerrilla wars are always intensely political," he writes, requiring reporters to take secondary sources with a grain of salt and confirm facts on the ground. Great example: We thought the Iraqi army was crushed in 2003 by US airstrikes, but a closer look at their tanks showed that they had been abandoned long before those airstrikes arrived. The Iraqi army "had simply disbanded and gone home."
  • The media oversimplified the Iraq and Afghanistan wars when they "dovetailed with political propaganda" that demonized Saddam Hussein and the Taliban. "The crippling inadequacies of the opposition were ignored."
  • Reporters soaked up the revolutionary spirit that prevailed during the Arab Spring, believing that cell phones and Facebook had swept aside ancient Middle East antagonisms. No such luck, apparently.
  • But Cockburn defends journalists against the criticism that they just hide out in hotels: "A more substantive charge is that they write too much about firefights and skirmishes, the fireworks of war, while neglecting the broader picture that might determine the outcome."
Click for Cockburn's full piece.

More From Newser
My Take on This Story
To report an error on this story,
notify our editors.
Why War Reporters Get It So Wrong is...
5%
13%
5%
60%
1%
17%
Show results without voting
You Might Like
Comments
Showing 3 of 28 comments
TheJman
Oct 4, 2013 6:09 PM CDT
Todays media is lefty immature idiots who slant everything. No way of getting things right when you're writing fiction.
JT119
Oct 4, 2013 1:39 PM CDT
looks at how the media fumbled the ball in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. In each case, he argues, reporters portrayed Western involvement as humanitarian and over-emphasized its military successes. "More than most armed struggles, the conflicts have been propaganda wars in which newspaper, television and radio journalists played a central role," he writes Only FOOLs don't know this, the sad thing is, there are so many.
jgarbuz
Oct 4, 2013 12:00 PM CDT
In any case, it is the very definition of a REPORTER to document events and not to pontificate on them. That is the job of the editorial opinion writers. The on-the-scene reporter is supposed to report what his or her eyes see, not what his mind, biases or prejudices tell him or her. If he or she thinks he or she is being fooled, they can convey their feelings to the editorial writers to opine on. Reporters should go by their job descriptions, which is just to document and report what they see. Others can opine about the "big picture."