03-12-2004, 01:00 AM
Last I heard, the WT was a sorta right wing rag.
I was under that impression too. Nevertheless, this article seems to have a bit of an anti-Bush overtone, and doesn't have much in the way of an actual news story. I find anti-Bush op eds somewhat amusing, but they ought to be on the editorial page. The non-editorial part of this story would be hard to stretch for more than 3 sentences.
And of course, you are right. The media seems to want it both ways, to be completely immune to harm and to be able to report every tidbit of what is going on in a combat zone; to be treated like the world's most important people and yet to be considered absolutely neutral. When you report on combat, you are a part of the combat, both in terms of risk to yourself and also in terms of influencing the outcome of what is going on. There is no such thing as a neutral reporter in combat, and even if there were such a thing he could still get caught in the crossfire. A lot of reporters fully understand both aspects of that, but obviously some of them don't.
I was under that impression too. Nevertheless, this article seems to have a bit of an anti-Bush overtone, and doesn't have much in the way of an actual news story. I find anti-Bush op eds somewhat amusing, but they ought to be on the editorial page. The non-editorial part of this story would be hard to stretch for more than 3 sentences.
And of course, you are right. The media seems to want it both ways, to be completely immune to harm and to be able to report every tidbit of what is going on in a combat zone; to be treated like the world's most important people and yet to be considered absolutely neutral. When you report on combat, you are a part of the combat, both in terms of risk to yourself and also in terms of influencing the outcome of what is going on. There is no such thing as a neutral reporter in combat, and even if there were such a thing he could still get caught in the crossfire. A lot of reporters fully understand both aspects of that, but obviously some of them don't.