Bad news.. We knew it was coming..

[MattM 0]

i think it isn't smart to tell everything our troops are doing... surely some from Iraq is watching.....

Matt

[flyingferret 0]

Yeah...ask the Christian Science Monitor reporter that got kicked out On the other hand, in a war you cannot alienate the press, the sheople follow them too closely. Even though propoganda has bad conotation, it is necessary for every war.

--
All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

[billvon 2,475]

>Maybe they weren't supposed to report it yet.

As most browsers can cache, one would think that yanking it has just about zero value in terms of preventing the spread of dangerous information. It would, however, have value in limiting the egg-on-face effect that would come from reporting errnoeus information.

[AggieDave 6]

However, if they did report something they weren't supposed to, yanking it could keep them in a good light with the armed forces, thus keeping their ability to report with the troops.

It could go both ways, Bill.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[flyingferret 0]

Actually this is a very interesting issue, that I have not seen anyone tackle. 'News' in this day and age is very fluid. Dozens of times have I seen an article updated, reviewed, reworked all at one link over several days. In my opinion, this virtually eliminates accountability for journalists as opposed to paper copy. I think there are some serious ethical issues there, but I have not seen many people bring it up.

That does not necessarily apply to the above link, but it got me thinking.

--
All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

[billvon 2,475]

>However, if they did report something they weren't supposed to,
> yanking it could keep them in a good light with the armed forces,
> thus keeping their ability to report with the troops.

I guess I have this hope that our military intelligence people are smarter than the general public, and will realize that even a 1 hour exposure on the net is not significantly different than a permanent posting on a website. If Rhino could find it, pulling it will do very little.

[rhino 0]

It just seems like a bad move allowing CNN to say we ONLY have 1,000 soldiers in Northern Iraq. I almost think they are being used as bait. I think we have more than that.

I have been watching FOXNEWS too.. The rest seem redundant.

[billvon 2,475]

>It just seems like a bad move allowing CNN to say we ONLY have
> 1,000 soldiers in Northern Iraq.

With the amount of effort the military spends dealing with the press, I think they've got a good handle on controlling the information they put out. While I don't think anyone is outright lying to the press (usually) I get the distinct feeling that the military is telling them what they want told to the world. Which is what you'd expect.

>I have been watching FOXNEWS too..

I usually watch FOX when the TV's on here and listen to NPR in the morning; gets me both US points of view.

[rgoper 0]

Quote

It just seems like a bad move allowing CNN to say we ONLY have 1,000 soldiers in Northern Iraq. I almost think they are being used as bait. I think we have more than that.

we don't know this wasn't "reverse psy ops" the BBC is probably the most reliable news source here in saudi, with sky news coming in second. CNN is a joke. Al Jazeer is "skewed" to say the least, although part of th UAE, they are "stradling the fence"

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[Tf15 0]

Quote

i think it isn't smart to tell everything our troops are doing... surely some from Iraq is watching.....

I doubt the embedded reporters report anything the military doesn't want the world to know.

Three times is enemy action

[Tf15 0]

Quote

Either way, Foxnews has surpassed CNN in the polls. More people are watching Foxnews than anything else, at least in the US. Erego, someone agrees with it. You want hardcore right....try newsmax :)

popularity != accuracy

Three times is enemy action

[wmw999 2,174]

Quote

'News' in this day and age is very fluid. Dozens of times have I seen an article updated, reviewed, reworked all at one link over several days. In my opinion, this virtually eliminates accountability for journalists as opposed to paper copy.

While I don't like the "something has happened" school of early reporting, I think that the ability to learn more and report it as you go along is very important. If you can only write down completely known and understood stories, well, what's the difference then between news and history.

I'd like to see more embarrassment attached to printing stuff that's actually inaccurate. Right now retractions go in little tiny letters somewhere inside for print. I don't know about realtime media.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[flyingferret 0]

In media veiwing wars, accuracy does not really matter, not in a commercial sense. The people's reactions matter. I dont agree with it, but it drives modern media. The military knows this. they know where all the reporters are in Iraq, you really think vice versa is true. I do not. If you have friends in the forces, talk to them. There is a lot of talk in the back channels, this war is doing just fine. and I think it will go down in the textbooks.

--
All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

[flyingferret 0]

Followup articles are much better in my opinion then changing the text, especially if it was present for a day or a week. Someone quotes the article, then the article changes, this is bad. Imagine no posts on dropzone, simply an empty block for each user and you could change it as events changed. There is no record.

--
All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

[Tf15 0]

Quote

In media veiwing wars, accuracy does not really matter, not in a commercial sense. The people's reactions matter. I dont agree with it, but it drives modern media. The military knows this. they know where all the reporters are in Iraq, you really think vice versa is true. I do not. If you have friends in the forces, talk to them. There is a lot of talk in the back channels, this war is doing just fine. and I think it will go down in the textbooks.

!= means not equal in Geek.

Poularity does not equal accuracy.

Three times is enemy action

[flyingferret 0]

Didn't I address that?

I am rather familiar with <> <_ == ++ -- != #!, etc.

--
All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI.

[Tf15 0]

Quote

Didn't I address that?

I am rather familiar with <> <_ == ++ -- != #!, etc.

Well, I found your first reply semi-comprehensible, so I thought I'd clarify mine, just in case you misunderstood what I wrote originally. I'm still not sure what you meant.

Three times is enemy action

[ManleyPete 0]

Quote

Iraqi's have been seen in FULL MOP4 gear unloading 50 gallon drums at fighting locations. This has been seen not only in Baghdad but by the Marines.

I'm not worried at all.
I know that the Airborne guys plus most of the other servicemen have their own Chemical Yard Personnal Retroactive Environmental System - aka CYPRES

It will protect them - no matter what.
They just have to remember to turn it on.