Thursday, December 15, 2005
Media surprised by success of the election
Despite the resounding successes of the last two rounds of voting in Iraq, and the assurances of just about everyone on the ground except the terrorists, the media is yet again taken by surprise that today's elections are going as well as they are.
From the NY Times:
How that loose, baggy elephant of an opening sentence got through the copy desk I'll never know.
But why is it remarkable for there to be a lack of "large-scale" violence? "Large-scale" violence - which I define loosely as the clash of battalion-sized elements or larger - has been largely confined to the Al Anbar province and to a lesser extent, Baghdad for some time. The vast majority of the country is peaceful most of the time. Which is why, for instance, we were able to have near-nationwide votes as long ago as a year.
Nevertheless, both CNN and the New York Times -- as if they were determined to show us how easy it is to lead them around by the nose, give prominent billing to a single mortar strike in Baghdad. Yep: Two assholes with a truck who change nothing and have the power to change nothing are making the global media.
All in all, though, even Eeyore the Editor at the New York Times couldn't conceal the terriffic news.
So when is the Times going to run their obnoxious "raises questions" formulation? As in: "The success of the latest round of voting in Iraq and the failure of the insurgency to create any meaningful disruption raises questions about the prospects and relevance of the insurgency, and suggests that the United States may have been successful in interdicting terrorist efforts and disrupting the insurgency with recent offensives in the Al Anbar and Niniveh provinces. The American strategy seems to be working."
No. Couldn't happen.
Splash, out
Jason
From the NY Times:
In a day remarkable for the absence of large-scale violence, millions of Iraqi voters, many of whom dressed in their best and traveling with family members, streamed to the polls today to cast ballots in a nationwide election as Iraqi leaders predicted the vote would split almost evenly between secular and Islamist parties.
How that loose, baggy elephant of an opening sentence got through the copy desk I'll never know.
But why is it remarkable for there to be a lack of "large-scale" violence? "Large-scale" violence - which I define loosely as the clash of battalion-sized elements or larger - has been largely confined to the Al Anbar province and to a lesser extent, Baghdad for some time. The vast majority of the country is peaceful most of the time. Which is why, for instance, we were able to have near-nationwide votes as long ago as a year.
Nevertheless, both CNN and the New York Times -- as if they were determined to show us how easy it is to lead them around by the nose, give prominent billing to a single mortar strike in Baghdad. Yep: Two assholes with a truck who change nothing and have the power to change nothing are making the global media.
All in all, though, even Eeyore the Editor at the New York Times couldn't conceal the terriffic news.
So when is the Times going to run their obnoxious "raises questions" formulation? As in: "The success of the latest round of voting in Iraq and the failure of the insurgency to create any meaningful disruption raises questions about the prospects and relevance of the insurgency, and suggests that the United States may have been successful in interdicting terrorist efforts and disrupting the insurgency with recent offensives in the Al Anbar and Niniveh provinces. The American strategy seems to be working."
No. Couldn't happen.
Splash, out
Jason
Comments:
No, that might possibly lead them to admitting that...coughBush did something rightcough.
Can't have that. Might get them thrown out of the He-man Bush Haters Club. I know their circulation has been shrinking, but that would only increase those numbers.
Can't have that. Might get them thrown out of the He-man Bush Haters Club. I know their circulation has been shrinking, but that would only increase those numbers.
# posted by 
: 6:22 PM
: 6:22 PM
The MSM was surprised by the ABC News poll of Iraqis, too. Maybe they're really that stupid?
# posted by : 7:19 PM
: 7:19 PM
Jason writes: "Two assholes with a [mortar] who change nothing and have the power to change nothing are making the global media."
But this is exactly what the "mainstream" media have been doing all along -- serving as an open conduit for enemy propaganda.
Imagine the media covering every mortar round and explosion that occurred during World War II?
With the "mainstream" media serving as a willing accomplice, our enemies can saturate news coverage for a full year with only 365 hand grenades -- one explosion per day.
It's really that simple, and it's really that pathetic.
Post a Comment
But this is exactly what the "mainstream" media have been doing all along -- serving as an open conduit for enemy propaganda.
Imagine the media covering every mortar round and explosion that occurred during World War II?
With the "mainstream" media serving as a willing accomplice, our enemies can saturate news coverage for a full year with only 365 hand grenades -- one explosion per day.
It's really that simple, and it's really that pathetic.
# posted by : 11:10 AM
: 11:10 AM
