[CO_dreamer]

Since the declaration that major combat had ended in May, every single casualty has been reported.

Every single casualty was reported before that too, but back then, it was reported on the front page. Now, I find the dead listed on page 20, and the wounded aren't mentioned at all, unless fatalities are also involved, per US Army policy. Frankly, I don't know what the media is expected to do. Are the soldiers who die today less deserving of mention in the newspapers than the soldiers who died during the invasion?

[presidio9]

A quick survey of news websites reveals that all of them are reporting the US soldier killed today near Fallujah on their virtual "front pages." I understand the point that you are trying to make, and it is admirable. However, the idea that the media is somehow ignoring the deaths of soldiers now that the war is over is flat-out untrue. If anything, the are harping more on each soldier's death now than they were during the war. The media is doing everything they can to foster a sense of defeatism in Americans.

[boxerblues]

Every death is note worthy as it relates to the story, but every story coming out of Iraq is not related to the deaths and does not need to have this same sentence over & over & over