Matthew B. Stannard: Journalism's current crisis
... Biased to the right? Biased to the left? Some academics suggest the Iraq war coverage wasn't so different from the way past wars have been covered.
"The press treated the war at the beginning the way the press treated other wars at the beginning, and that was: There's nothing to discuss. We're off to war," said Theodore Glasser, of Stanford University's Graduate School of Journalism.
"There was no debate among Democrats and Republicans (about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq), therefore there was no debate in the press. The press has always had a hard time covering debate outside the mainstream."
Nor were the methods used to cover the war itself necessarily different from past wars, Glasser said. Embedding with military units, for example, a program sharply criticized by many for creating a too-cozy relationship between reporters and troops, was the norm in past wars, Glasser said. Although reporters were kept at arm's length during the first Gulf War, they commonly rode along with troops in Vietnam, Korea and World War II, he said.
The lack of critical coverage of the pre-war period isn't much different than in past conflicts, Kunkel said. Indeed, while he agreed that the press was somewhat cowed by patriotic pressures after the Sept. 11 attacks, Kunkel suggested the quality of journalism before the war wasn't an anomaly.
"If you look at the arc of journalism in general, from Watergate on, the press (today) has probably been more aggressive toward the government than at any time in American history, especially when you're talking about the run-up to the war," he said. "Where was the press in the run-up to Vietnam? Where was the press in the run-up to (the first Gulf War)?"
Even the White House's control of information and efforts to shape media coverage differ from the past mainly in degree, not in kind, said Robert Lichter, president of the Center for Media and Public Affairs.
"This administration really has been better at keeping people on the reservation generally ... but they've all tried," he said. Nevertheless, the most recent report on the State of the News Media by the Project for Excellence in Journalism found that most people see the press as slanted and more concerned with the bottom line than informing the public. The same survey found that a majority of national reporters feel that the press is too easy on the White House and that journalism is being hurt by bottom-line pressures....
Read entire article at San Francisco Chronicle
"The press treated the war at the beginning the way the press treated other wars at the beginning, and that was: There's nothing to discuss. We're off to war," said Theodore Glasser, of Stanford University's Graduate School of Journalism.
"There was no debate among Democrats and Republicans (about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq), therefore there was no debate in the press. The press has always had a hard time covering debate outside the mainstream."
Nor were the methods used to cover the war itself necessarily different from past wars, Glasser said. Embedding with military units, for example, a program sharply criticized by many for creating a too-cozy relationship between reporters and troops, was the norm in past wars, Glasser said. Although reporters were kept at arm's length during the first Gulf War, they commonly rode along with troops in Vietnam, Korea and World War II, he said.
The lack of critical coverage of the pre-war period isn't much different than in past conflicts, Kunkel said. Indeed, while he agreed that the press was somewhat cowed by patriotic pressures after the Sept. 11 attacks, Kunkel suggested the quality of journalism before the war wasn't an anomaly.
"If you look at the arc of journalism in general, from Watergate on, the press (today) has probably been more aggressive toward the government than at any time in American history, especially when you're talking about the run-up to the war," he said. "Where was the press in the run-up to Vietnam? Where was the press in the run-up to (the first Gulf War)?"
Even the White House's control of information and efforts to shape media coverage differ from the past mainly in degree, not in kind, said Robert Lichter, president of the Center for Media and Public Affairs.
"This administration really has been better at keeping people on the reservation generally ... but they've all tried," he said. Nevertheless, the most recent report on the State of the News Media by the Project for Excellence in Journalism found that most people see the press as slanted and more concerned with the bottom line than informing the public. The same survey found that a majority of national reporters feel that the press is too easy on the White House and that journalism is being hurt by bottom-line pressures....