<< MEDIA WORLD NOT LIKED ~ MAIN ~ A SCIENTIFIC SOLUTION >>

JUST ASK THE EDITORS

The NYT attempts to work out why coverage of the war has declined. After exploring a range of possible reasons - reduced public interest, danger to reporters, shrinking newsroom budgets, lack of a compelling narrative, cloying Georgio Moroder soundtrack - this longshot receives passing mention:

The drop accelerated with a sharp decline in violence in Iraq that began at the end of last summer. The last six months have been safer for American troops than any comparable period since the war began ...

They might be on to something.

(Via Alan R.M. Jones)

UPDATE. Bad news from Iraq is suddenly Time’s top online story:

Death had been taking something of a holiday in Iraq, but it seemed to come back from vacation with a vengeance on Easter, with ominous implications for American strategy. Sunday dawned in Baghdad’s Green Zone with a barrage of mortars courtesy of Shi’ite militiamen. Several more mortars poured in throughout the day. Meanwhile, attacks across Iraq on Sunday killed dozens of people, including four American soldiers in a deadly roadside bombing in southern Baghdad. That last incident raised the number of U.S. military fatalities in Iraq to 4,000. While an American military spokesman pointed out that “no casualty is more or less significant than another,” the timing of the ramped-up violence is telling.

The timing of many things is telling. As is the “ramping up”.

Posted by Tim B. on 03/24/2008 at 11:30 AM
  1. Wait a sec—you mean a decline in sticks with which to beat a Republican administration bears a direct correlation to a decline in interest in the topic? No way!

    Posted by SoberHT on 2008 03 24 at 11:44 AM • permalink

  2. How about this for a reason:  Leftwing bias coupled with unethical and unprofessional journalistic practices.

    Posted by wronwright on 2008 03 24 at 11:48 AM • permalink

  3. Lack of a compelling narrative sums up reasons 1-100.

    We’re winning.

    Posted by yojimbo on 2008 03 24 at 11:50 AM • permalink

  4. The NYT attempts to work out why coverage of the war has declined.

    Maybe they should ask - and answer - themselves. Unless they suspect they’ll lie.

    Posted by Dave S. on 2008 03 24 at 12:32 PM • permalink

  5. Here are some other options: distraction from proselytizing for the Obamessiah, too much time spent deciding how not to cover the den of iniquity that is the Governor’s Mansion in Albany, or fatigue brought on by the latter stages of BDS.

    Posted by charles austin on 2008 03 24 at 01:51 PM • permalink

  6. This from the same people who wondered why a record number of criminals are in prison even though crime is down.

    Posted by Latino on 2008 03 24 at 02:31 PM • permalink

  7. Unless they suspect they’ll lie.

    What d’you mean “suspect”, Dave?  They know that they lie.  Ergo, they won’t ask themselves.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2008 03 24 at 02:44 PM • permalink

  8. I’m with yojimbo, “lack of a compelling narrative”.  Not enough baby-killing murderers in uniform being killed by heroic ROP freedom fighters.

    [/sarc] for those who lack the sarcasm bone.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2008 03 24 at 04:43 PM • permalink

  9. Oh, yeah, and let me add, not enough beaten-down, victimized, brutalized innocent Iraqis being killed by baby-killing murderers in uniform.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2008 03 24 at 04:44 PM • permalink

  10. The BBC is similarly confused.

    All that research to avoid facing the truth: they don’t want to report that the coalition is beating the insurgency.

    Posted by PJF-UK on 2008 03 24 at 05:50 PM • permalink

  11. Hell, why give public coverage to all those Surge Wannabe Soldiers. 
    Just living in clover on government money now that they aren’t covered in Quagmire.

    Posted by Barrie on 2008 03 24 at 06:29 PM • permalink

  12. No news is good news.

    Posted by kae on 2008 03 24 at 06:51 PM • permalink

  13. #12 Kae, or as the MSM have it, good news is bad news.

    Posted by Wimpy Canadian on 2008 03 24 at 07:39 PM • permalink

  14. Get your Grim Milestones here! USA has over 40,000 road deaths annually.

    Posted by blogstrop on 2008 03 25 at 07:09 AM • permalink

  15. #14
    That’s it then.
    It’s settled.

    They should withdraw all drivers from the USA!

    Posted by kae on 2008 03 25 at 07:16 AM • permalink

  16. #10—The coalition is beating the insurgency?  That’s not what is being reported in the media. If it’s not reported, how can it possibly be true?

    It’s a quagmire. US military presence is the cause that recruits terrorists for the insurgency. The US is responsible for the populist insurgency—which is attempting to oust the occupying military forces. The sooner the US leaves the sooner the Iraqi people can manage their own unique process of self-determination.

    The coalition is winning? How could that be a compelling narrative? Such would run counter to the narrative the media has been spinning for over five years. It would destroy the remaining, minuscule, credibility that the media has to report news, as opposed to being an active political wing of the Democratic Party. And we can’t have that.

    Hint: sarcasm involved.

    Posted by Forbes on 2008 03 27 at 06:08 PM • permalink

  17. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.