Disappearing act: Media ignores Iraq
posted at 12:25 pm on March 17, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Has David Blaine taught the American news media a new trick? The AP’s David Bauder notices that they have conducted a disappearing act with the war in Iraq. Suddenly, the subject has mostly vanished from coverage, although the upcoming five-year anniversary of the invasion will make it hard to ignore:
Remember the war in Iraq?
The question isn’t entirely facetious. The war has nearly vanished from TV screens over the past few months, replaced by stories about the fascinating presidential campaign and faltering economy.
Yet Americans continue to fight and die there, five years after the war started in March 2003. …
Statistics clearly illustrate the diminished attention. For the first 10 weeks of the year, the war accounted for 3 percent of television, newspaper and Internet stories in the Project for Excellence in Journalism’s survey of news coverage. During the same period in 2007, Iraq filled 23 percent of the news hole.
The difference is even more stark on cable news networks: 24 percent of the time spent on Iraq last year, just 1 percent this year.
Bauder blames the change on the “fatigue factor”. Supposedly, Americans have tired of the war and of hearing about it, and so the news networks have stopped covering it. The presidential campaign gave them an excuse to cut back on expensive war correspondence, and instead allowed them to cover a much less costly domestic story. It also allowed them to avoid the danger of reporting in a war zone.
All of that sounds reasonable, but Bauder manages to skip over another much more likely reason: the news got better, and the media doesn’t want to cover it. He provides evidence for this in his own analysis:
It’s possible to pinpoint the exact week that the switch turned off. The war averaged 30 minutes per week of coverage last year on the three network evening newscasts up until Gen. David Petraeus, commander of the U.S. forces, testified in September about the surge’s progress, according to news consultant Andrew Tyndall. In the last 15 weeks of the year, the broadcasts collectively spent four minutes per week on the war.
Bauder fails to note the political impact of Petraeus’ testimony. That week, Democrats practically queued up in front of television cameras to accuse Petraeus of playing politics, and Hillary Clinton accused him of lying to Congress. The unseemly nature of the attacks on a serving US military commander repulsed Americans, and the discovery that Petraeus was right made it even worse.
Ever since then, the media have sought to play down Iraq. They have pulled back coverage, not because of fatigue, but because they have been proven incorrect in their rush to portray it as a military failure. They have grudgingly noted the progress made in Iraq since last year’s change in strategy and tactics, and barely noticed when Iraq began passing the reconciliation legislation demanded by Congress this year and last.
The American public has noticed the improvement. Support for staying in Iraq until the successful completion of the mission has risen significantly. Even the Iraqis want us to remain in Iraq, if not in the current role for very much longer, in order to help fight terrorism and bolster their security. The media, which like the Democrats mostly bid on failure, seems churlishly determined not to report on the success for reasons other than “fatigue”.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
this ought to be fun, 3 senators who have zip experience in business telling us how they are gonna fix things
windansea on March 17, 2008 at 12:30 PM
What’s that saying? “Good news is no news”?
Tony737 on March 17, 2008 at 12:32 PM
They will pick it up now
Female Iraqi Suicide bomber hits just outside Hussien mosque in Karbala
William Amos on March 17, 2008 at 12:32 PM
What’s to report? Reid et al declared it lost a long time ago.
davidk on March 17, 2008 at 12:33 PM
Not to worry. Just in time, we are approaching another grim milestone.
Matticus Finch on March 17, 2008 at 12:34 PM
That is, 4,000 deaths.
Matticus Finch on March 17, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Unfortunately, that’s probably true. The media is in the “sales” business…air/print what sells. It’s all about ratings. And people aren’t clamoring for good news in Iraq. They want to know who Paris Hilton is dating next.
JetBoy on March 17, 2008 at 12:40 PM
Media reporter: “Stupid Surge”.
Tony737 on March 17, 2008 at 12:40 PM
Where oh where is all the coverage of the news from Iraq? Good question.
There were a couple pieces over the troops feeeling forgotten in Iraq over the week-end.
I guess the media has more important things to do… whatever that IS.
normsrevenge on March 17, 2008 at 12:42 PM
it’s pretty obvious, the deciders have decided that they can help Obama & Hillary better by stressing the economy
windansea on March 17, 2008 at 12:45 PM
I still can’t believe that the latest Pentagon investigation into Saddam and Terrorism said he WAS working with groups in the Al Queda network, he WAS a terrorist threat, and it’s all documented. That’s almost like having a report come out and say, ‘Yeah, Saddam had some WMD, dumped it, shipped out some other stuff, and US/UN was only wrong on about 1/4 WMD issues’
.
Oh wait, they had that report out years ago. It was called the Duelfer Report.
.
History and News are two entirely different animals
scottm on March 17, 2008 at 12:45 PM
Just thinking out loud here, but if relentlessly bad news reporting from the front is the Cause of so much viewer/citizen “war fatigue” wouldnt more balanced coverage of the measured but undeniable successes of late be a good antidote????
Mike D. on March 17, 2008 at 12:47 PM
HotAir Exclusive: Senate Leader Reid Bombs Again.
If it bleeds, it leads.
Bacchus on March 17, 2008 at 12:47 PM
clarification
yo on March 17, 2008 at 12:49 PM
I would agree that no news is good news. Perhaps now the military can continue unencumbered in getting the job done…
Wyznowski on March 17, 2008 at 12:52 PM
The Dems, aided by liberal news cable outlets like CNN, have had an agenda for the whole five years — bring down Bush. A defeat in Iraq would bring down Bush as well. This is precisely why the Dems in their talking points have done nothing but aid and comfort our enemies in Iraq so that they (the Dems) can regain their power. Pretty disgusting, huh? But, oh so very true. CNN, whose producers and staffers are obviously anti-war and anti-Bush, are the Dems willing accomplice. To bring down Bush, who they apparently dislike with a passion, they are willing to aid and comfort our enemies in Iraq and Iran on a daily basis. Want proof? Watch and monitor CNN. You will also do well to monitor MSNBC and the NYT and even C-Span.
Travis1 on March 17, 2008 at 12:55 PM
I think that most Americans are “just a little” more concerned with such things as the price of a gallon of gas, the falling price of their home, if they can make their mortgage payment and what is happening to their 401K’s, and well Britney and Paris and Kristen of course, than they are about Iraq and Iraqis.
Aleph on March 17, 2008 at 12:56 PM
Has Hillary ever been challenged on her insult to General Petraeus’s personal integrity? That might create a tap dance even Slick would envy.
a capella on March 17, 2008 at 12:59 PM
While I appreciate the complaint that the MSM is ignoring the good news, and it’s good to point out this fault, I’m glad they are ignoring Iraq and I think it is a good thing, mostly because the presumption in the complaint is that if they weren’t ignoring Iraq, they would be reporting the good news.
I’ll argue that’s false and I have the MSM to prove it. No matter how much you criticize them they won’t report the good news. So, let them use whatever excuse they want for staying away. They’ll leave our military alone to concentrate on their successful work uninterrupted and they won’t be stirring up Iraqi animosities and fears.
Dusty on March 17, 2008 at 1:02 PM
Didn’t Coulter say that we’d know that the surge was working if coverage dried up?
Yesterday on Stephanopolous’s show Pelosi surrendered one more time. And she did it with that uppity botoxed smirk like an American defeat warmed her insides.
snaggletoothie on March 17, 2008 at 1:03 PM
How could anyone vote for Hillary or Obama for POTUS based on their vaunted “judgment” when both of them were so spectacularly wrong on their pronouncements of failure in Iraq? Don’t these presumptuous half-wits ever pay a price for being wrong, wrong, wrong??
Cicero43 on March 17, 2008 at 1:09 PM
What about Obama?
yo on March 17, 2008 at 1:12 PM
This is a no-brainer, the coverage has decreased because the body count has decreased. The MSM is only interested in ratings and disparaging “the evil empire” as often and in anyway they can.
Liberty or Death on March 17, 2008 at 1:23 PM
The Pinkos and the rest of the Moonbat Left won’t let us forget.
If the MSM doesn’t cover the war, the moonbats will do more radical things to keep it in our collective conscious
ToddonCapeCod on March 17, 2008 at 1:25 PM
The MSM never fails to disappoint.
Blaming it on the viewers isn’t new, either, just another tired excuse.
The reporters failed in their bid to lose the war for us before the election, so now they don’t even want to talk about it.
Sick bastards.
Merovign on March 17, 2008 at 1:35 PM
Where are the reporters? Back in New York at the bar having a drink. It’s not bleeding in Iraq enough for it to lead. Besides, if we win in Iraq and it’s Bush’s fault, where does that leave the media? I mean, really, it’s like Bush was right all along and it was good for him to ignore the media saying otherwise. That would mean Iraq is not Vietnam after all.
Tantor on March 17, 2008 at 1:51 PM
Rember when these videos started coming out, and the media called it propoganda?
Seven Percent Solution on March 17, 2008 at 1:53 PM
Today’s New York Times has two stories about Iraq on the cover, with a full-page jump on A6, a feature story on Kurdistan and a list of the nine latest KIA on A8 and a half-page jump on A15.
That’s in addition to two more stories on the wider Middle East (Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, respectively).
Imagine if the bastards didn’t ignore Iraq…
factoid on March 17, 2008 at 1:55 PM
Remember the old adage: if it bleeds, it leads. Since there is much less blood these days, the media has lost interest.
However, as soon as the Dims can figure out a way to spin the success in Iraq as a result of their policies/pressure, then the media will trumpet the cause again.
Mallard T. Drake on March 17, 2008 at 2:00 PM
While I’m not normally a conspiracy theorist, I have also noticed that the defeatist rhetoric from the left politicos has lightened some as well.
I think the dems are assuming they will have someone in the White House this time next year, and they know they will need to continue the war in Iraq. They just need to craft the spin so that when they don’t immediately withdraw the troops, they can blame it on Bush for leaving them a ‘mess’ to clean up.
If the dems aren’t screaming about it, the MSM won’t repeat it ad nauseam.
So, in my opinion, we will see many of those who claim to be opposed to the war, come to support the war once the dems are in power.
If it weren’t so damn dangerous, it would be funny watching these fools go full circle ‘for the war/ against the war/ for the war’ being the lemmings they are.
cntrlfrk on March 17, 2008 at 2:21 PM
That’s as big of a pile of steaming BS as nobama saying he never heard his mentor’s hate speech until just recently.
Its really easy the don’t want to report of the victories and accomplishments because it under cuts their premise that this is another Vietnam , and they want to make a name for themselves just like some others did back in the late 60’s by lying to the American people and not showing them the other side of the story . You put American troops kicking ass and taking names sending jihadist to Allah’s whore house and rib shack places like rahmadi and faluga being peaceful in comparison to what they use to be and the American people will turn on the anti war anti American moonbats and msm faster than a 10k$ a hour hooker sells her story to the tabloids.
Mojack420 on March 17, 2008 at 2:32 PM
There’s still a war going on?
29Victor on March 17, 2008 at 2:43 PM
The democrats and the MSM are fatigued about the improving situation.
ThePrez on March 17, 2008 at 2:44 PM
If it bleeds it leads. If it succeeds its buried!
Maquis on March 17, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Disappearing act: Media ignores Iraq
posted at 12:25 pm on March 17, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Disappearing Posts on “Hot Air[e]”
How’s that go again “Eddy…”?
Why would you dissapear olde posts…?
EDDY….?
J_Gocht on March 17, 2008 at 7:08 PM
Comment pages: