News reporting, American vs other

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2003-03-28 05:48am

One of our local news providers showed an article on what the news networks in the US have been showing.

It including hordes of flag waving, eagles transposed over Iraqi and American flags, anchors crying as he reads out the orders that have been given to frontline troops, Dirty Harry terminology and imagery from Iraq that would have won an Oscar. They also mentioned that imagery such as the dead Iraqi bodies lying by the side of the road as American vehicles drove passed (something that I've gotten used to seeing on the local news) also wasn't being shown.

Now before I assume that the local news hasn't been doing any exaggerating of their own, what's your opinion of the way the war is reported in the US compared other countries?

From an outside perspective, it looks as though it goes beyond a little embellishment. The way I saw it they couldn't have been anymore obvious in what they intended their audience to think if they had big signs up saying "Everything you see here is good, to question this is to stand against everything you see here."

Post by **Edi** » 2003-03-28 05:57am

That's pretty much the picture I have had of American TV news reporting (by the major networks anyway) for years. It is also an assessment a friend of mine over at the Heavengames boards has, and he happens to work for a Danish TV news agency and follows something like 50+ different news sources for a living. I know our news have shown footage from both sides and tend to be pretty even-handed.

I must add that unfortunately I do not see any of those channels here, except when our own news sources use their material, though more often than not they have their own. So my viewpoint is not completely objective. It is, however, almost identical to that of many who do get the American channels in addition to other news like BBC (I get that, at least) or their own national TV news.

Edi

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2003-03-28 06:08am

I watch Fox most of the time when I'm not intentionally hunting for something to double-check, and I can assure there have been dead Iraqi bodies on the roadside shown on it. They do have this rather neat computer graphic F-15 that flies through their intros now, transforming into an eagle in midflight and shooting lightning bolts whilst patriotic music plays in the background. But that isn't while the actual news is being reported.

generator_g1 · Post by **generator_g1** » 2003-03-28 06:29am

From an outside perspective, it looks as though it goes beyond a little embellishment.

That's the same impression I get, especially when I watch Fox News. I just go to the local news sources or BBC to get a more objective point of view. i live in Asia and I only get to watch Fox News on cable. . One of our local networks also has journalists still in Baghdad so they pretty much says what they see there.

Post by **NecronLord** » 2003-03-28 07:07am

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:They do have this rather neat computer graphic F-15 that flies through their intros now, transforming into an eagle in midflight and shooting lightning bolts whilst patriotic music plays in the background.

I smell crude propoganda...

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-03-28 07:08am

Actually, I'm sure they're a pair of missiles rather than lightningbolts ...

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-03-28 07:30am

Yeah , I found that interesting as well. News anchor crying? ABC wasnt he? man needs to get it together.
We also had the POW's displyed as well as we got coverage, didnt the American newsies selfcensor that?

Phil Skayhan · Post by **Phil Skayhan** » 2003-03-28 07:54am

Stuart Mackey wrote:Yeah , I found that interesting as well. News anchor crying? ABC wasnt he? man needs to get it together.
We also had the POW's displyed as well as we got coverage, didnt the American newsies selfcensor that?

SFGate wrote:While there was much to absorb if you were channel flipping -- videos of Iraqis in Safwan cheering the arrival of U.S. forces, NBC's footage of the crashed American helicopter that took 12 lives, Tom Brokaw crying during an interview with the mother of a Marine killed Friday, the father of a slain Marine angrily telling President Bush to "take a good look at this picture" of his son, or a bevy of informative reports from the battle, it was the initial "shock and awe" attack that remained most vivid.

And yes the major network and cable news outlets did not show the full tape, although on Sunday night, NBC showed the interview with a POW, after establishing that his family was aware of his capture.

I still have not seen it. But if I so desire, I'm sure I could easily find somewhere to download it.

Death from the Sea · Post by **Death from the Sea** » 2003-03-28 11:00am

The news here in the US is way over done. They sensationalize (spelling?) everything to a point where it is ridiculous. The second problem is that they no longer really confirm their stories anymore, they "run to the presses" with fresh info, even if it turns out to be wrong an hour later it is too late it was already broadcast. Alot of this has been caused by the 24 hour news channels competing to bring you the news first. When watching the news (in any country) you have to becareful about what info you take at full face value. With the conflict (it is not a WAR) in Iraq I have a pretty good eye for waht is going on,being a former member of the American military.

Companion Cube · Post by **Companion Cube** » 2003-03-28 12:13pm

The coverage in Britain is much the same, at least on Sky News, and as far as war footage is concerned. Nothing like those overt displays of patriotism though(There's only the occasional Union Jack, at least when I'm watching). I guess we Brits are a little more restrained.

Queeb Salaron · Post by **Queeb Salaron** » 2003-03-28 12:23pm

Spyder wrote:From an outside perspective, it looks as though it goes beyond a little embellishment. The way I saw it they couldn't have been anymore obvious in what they intended their audience to think if they had big signs up saying "Everything you see here is good, to question this is to stand against everything you see here."

That's exactly it. Not only is it patriotic to support war (and somehow therefore un-partriotic to not support it), but it is a religious obligation. Remember when Bush said that he was going to "conduct a Crusade against terror?" Remember how he said numerous times that it's the Christian thing to do? And that God is on our side? And that we will seek justice in the name of God? The media loves that crap. They eat it up. So now not only is it un-patriotic to oppose the war, but it is also a heresy.

I've said it before: You know who else did that? Hitler.

Post by **RogueIce** » 2003-03-28 12:35pm

Queeb Salaron wrote:That's exactly it. Not only is it patriotic to support war (and somehow therefore un-partriotic to not support it), but it is a religious obligation. Remember when Bush said that he was going to "conduct a Crusade against terror?" Remember how he said numerous times that it's the Christian thing to do? And that God is on our side? And that we will seek justice in the name of God? The media loves that crap. They eat it up. So now not only is it un-patriotic to oppose the war, but it is also a heresy.

I've said it before: You know who else did that? Hitler.

I remember him saying a Crusade on Terror a few times, but that's pretty much stopped now. The rest of it I have yet to hear. Got any sources on it?

Spyder wrote:From an outside perspective, it looks as though it goes beyond a little embellishment. The way I saw it they couldn't have been anymore obvious in what they intended their audience to think if they had big signs up saying "Everything you see here is good, to question this is to stand against everything you see here."

Can't say that I've seen any of that in the reporting. They have their nifty little intro videos, but as far as the reporting goes, I've seen them lump the good with the bad.

As for Tom Brokaw crying, well, Hell, he was interviewing the mother of a dead Marine. You don't think that couldn't get a tad emotional?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-03-28 01:26pm

3rd Impact wrote:The coverage in Britain is much the same, at least on Sky News, and as far as war footage is concerned. Nothing like those overt displays of patriotism though(There's only the occasional Union Jack, at least when I'm watching). I guess we Brits are a little more restrained.

Firstly, just try and compare any UK news network to Fox... okay, maybe Sky News, but they're the same company and Sky was worse a few years ago.

I only watch CNN or Fox if I want a laugh or need news from the States, but Sky has CBS on in the morning and the Beeb show anything of relevance.

Secondly, it's Union Flag, Jack is only on a ship.

Queeb Salaron · Post by **Queeb Salaron** » 2003-03-28 03:13pm

RogueIce wrote:
Queeb Salaron wrote:That's exactly it. Not only is it patriotic to support war (and somehow therefore un-partriotic to not support it), but it is a religious obligation. Remember when Bush said that he was going to "conduct a Crusade against terror?" Remember how he said numerous times that it's the Christian thing to do? And that God is on our side? And that we will seek justice in the name of God? The media loves that crap. They eat it up. So now not only is it un-patriotic to oppose the war, but it is also a heresy.

I've said it before: You know who else did that? Hitler.
I remember him saying a Crusade on Terror a few times, but that's pretty much stopped now. The rest of it I have yet to hear. Got any sources on it?

Hmm... I'll have to take a look. It's not a serious point, though. Just kind of off-the-top-of-my-head, someone-argued-this-before-me kinda banter.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2003-03-28 04:09pm

3rd Impact wrote:The coverage in Britain is much the same, at least on Sky News, and as far as war footage is concerned. Nothing like those overt displays of patriotism though(There's only the occasional Union Jack, at least when I'm watching). I guess we Brits are a little more restrained.

Restrained? You guys viciously attack political figures, and your tabloids are ludicrous in comparison to our's. This is just some patriotic eye candy.

Queeb Salaron · Post by **Queeb Salaron** » 2003-03-28 04:13pm

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
3rd Impact wrote:The coverage in Britain is much the same, at least on Sky News, and as far as war footage is concerned. Nothing like those overt displays of patriotism though(There's only the occasional Union Jack, at least when I'm watching). I guess we Brits are a little more restrained.
Restrained? You guys viciously attack political figures, and your tabloids are ludicrous in comparison to our's. This is just some patriotic eye candy.

Link?

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2003-03-28 04:16pm

NecronLord wrote:

I smell crude propoganda...

That's a very nice image there, actually. Shows some fight, it does!

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2003-03-28 04:17pm

Queeb Salaron wrote: Link?

To what?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-03-28 04:19pm

One word: Guardian.

Tatterdemalion · Post by **Tatterdemalion** » 2003-03-28 04:39pm

Surely you can't be suggesting another article from the Comments and Opinions page?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-03-28 04:46pm

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
3rd Impact wrote:The coverage in Britain is much the same, at least on Sky News, and as far as war footage is concerned. Nothing like those overt displays of patriotism though(There's only the occasional Union Jack, at least when I'm watching). I guess we Brits are a little more restrained.
Restrained? You guys viciously attack political figures, and your tabloids are ludicrous in comparison to our's. This is just some patriotic eye candy.

What's wrong with viciously attacking political figures? Are you seriously suggesting that mindless jingoism and quasi-fascist suppression and demonization of dissent is somehow better than intense criticism of political figures?

Queeb Salaron · Post by **Queeb Salaron** » 2003-03-28 04:56pm

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
Queeb Salaron wrote: Link?
To what?

To some Brittish description of US leaders. I'm interested.

Companion Cube · Post by **Companion Cube** » 2003-03-28 05:00pm

In reply to all posts concerning my previous one: sorry if I wasn't clear, but I was referring only to TV. (Not having access to American Tabloids, I can't make a valid comparison) I do recognise that our tabloids are fairly extreme, but, like Darth Wong said, free speech (even if what is being said is idiotic) is important.

Side note: Sorry, I meant Union Flag

Companion Cube · Post by **Companion Cube** » 2003-03-28 05:05pm

Queeb Salaron wrote:
The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
Queeb Salaron wrote: Link?
To what?
To some Brittish description of US leaders. I'm interested.

I'm not sure if this helps, but you might want to read it anyway. It isn't particularly what you wanted, but it does feature some British opinions of US foreign policy...

Post by **NecronLord** » 2003-03-28 05:16pm

Tatterdemalion wrote:Surely you can't be suggesting another article from the Comments and Opinions page?

It's comments and analysis. And to all the guardian haters, have you seen the alternative?

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

News reporting, American vs other

News reporting, American vs other

Re: News reporting, American vs other

Re: News reporting, American vs other

Re: News reporting, American vs other