How the media changed

UPI ^ | April 8, 2003 | Martin Walker

[manna]

Well, what do you know!

[RippleFire]

bump

[Wolverine]

This reporter "gets it."

[Atlas Sneezed]

Of course it was alright.

He'd better make sure that his spell-checker is all right. Perhaps a graduate of the Associated Press?

[m1911]

"The military have become a private club, and one that has learned to distrust most of the media"

I think that sentence works both ways...

"The media have become a private club, and one that has learned to distrust most of the military"

[yankeedeerslayer]

Great article. It's a shame that all Americans aren't willing to share the appreciation for the military.

It turns out to have been an excellent idea to have embedded reporters - to put a human face on the folks they typically loathe.

Just one day on the front for these peaceniks/Sadamites would change a lot of perspectives.

[PackerBoy]

There is Sarge, who grumbles that this war is all about oil and is far from sure he likes it.

Huh? If he doesn't know better, he is completely clueless.

[InterceptPoint]

Something fundamental has happened to the British and U.S. media during this war. Those who have spent time on the front lines with the coalition troops, whether embedded with individual units or traveling independently through liberated Iraq, have learned to love the military.

You have to give the Bush team some real credit here. I think they firmly believe that they can push back on the liberal left wing bias in the U.S. (and world) press simply by letting in some light on the actions of our great fighting men and women of the military. A great strategy and it is clearly working. This must be driving the Dems crazy.

[fightinJAG]

wonderful bump

[Don W]

In proper English, alright is a common and correct contraction.

If you're going to be a spelling cop, at least have a clue.

[LibertyAndJusticeForAll]

PING!

[grobdriver]

I think that sentence works both ways... "The media have become a private club, and one that has learned to distrust most of the military"

I disagree.
I think those in the media had anti-military, anti-government attitudes before they became "journalists" - perhaps is why they became journalists, i.e. "to make a difference".
The media has always been antagonistic towards government and the enforcment arm of government, the military.
The military, OTOH, learned to mistrust them after seeing the disparity between what they know happened and what some "journalist" wrote happened and what their paper published.

[Indy Pendance]

ping

[JohnHuang2]

Thanks -- will read.

[m1911]

Actually, I think we agree. I was thinking of the transformation of "the media" as a whole, not of individuals in it. The change has certainly been aided by the self-selection you mention, especially in the Vietnam/Watergate era.

[big gray tabby]

Can you fix the link?

[aimhigh]

They are kind to one another, and considerate to civilians like us.

In other words, these are the first conservatives these liberal reporters have ever met. Most liberals are immersed in liberal clicks, and write their bile from bias, not experience.

[LiteKeeper]

bump

[grobdriver]

And most importantly, as I think we agree, the change is for the better.
Embedding journalists was brilliant.