Private Book

I think someone mentioned this but I've seen several US sniper films in the news. Frontlines ran specials on US snipers CNN runs them, FOX and MSNBC, no ones ever complained and they've shown many many enemy killings. I've been listening to the news and am amazed at how hysterical the right wing pundits are over this. It reminds me of the whole "video games kill people" debate. As if some mad dog killer marine is going to cry himself to sleep because CNN showed a video of actual combat from the other side. It’s just more made up nonsense. Show all footage IMO. Freedom of information is the FIRST amendment to the constitution not the last.
===========
P.S. Maybe if you stopped believing the professional fools who say leaving Iraq is defeat you wouldn’t feel that way. The pundits who say leaving is defeat are the same people who predicted we’d be greeted with flowers, who said the insurgency was in it’s last throes and that oil would pay for it all. They have been wrong about absolutely everything they predicted so why continue to buy into their BS? We all supported the notion of victory under several different definitions before the dimwits under the Bush administration F**ked it all up beyond recognition. How many times have you heard “the next six months are going to be critical” from these ass-hats? Now that they’ve failed ridiculously at every level we all support the notion of trying to fix the F**k up they've left us with. Don’t mistake our honest disagreements with the morons who got us into this in the first place with anti Americanism. There’s only so much you can do when the dummies and chicken hawks leave you with the worst possible scenario. After 6 years of constant bull sh*t mistakes it’s not unpatriotic to demand somebody who actually knows what the hell they are doing take over. I’d also like to point out that the only ones characterizing handing Iraq back to the Iraqis as “defeat” is the right wing. Most people think that forcing the Iraqis to secure their own nation and prop up their own government without relying on us like a crutch IS victory. Isn’t it tragically amusing to me to see the American political party who traditionally oppose all social welfare programs insist that the only way we can win in Iraq is to do everything for them? It’s their country, we got rid of Saddam for them and now they have to freaking run it themselves. If they want to go on killing each other over their idiotic debate concerning Muhammad’s death that’s their problem not ours. That’s what their democracy looks like whether we like it or not. Sorry to hijack the thread.

__________________

leejo

Just out of curiosity, is there anyone here who thinks the US troops should remain in Iraq AND supports showing this video? Or is there anyone who supports a rapid withdrawal who does not? I'm seeing a strong correlation so far.

Beatnik

For those truly interested in media matters, and specifically coverage of the current conflict by American and foreign media entities (lately), I strongly suggest you check out NPR's On the Media. This is perhaps my favorite show on NPR, where they take a typically dull topic (media and its interaction with society) and make it interesting in relevant on a weekly basis. I'm sure they'll have a story on this topic on this week's show, which should air Friday.

The show has elements of current news stories, media coverage analysis, irreverance, occassional satire, etc. It's kind of like Marketplace for media matters. It's generally very insightful, and they typically examine the editorial decisions that inform the airing of clips like this (which I haven't seen) or other stories.

__________________

Switchcraft

I believe the troops should stay in Iraq and I am ambivalent about this video. It does not bother me as much as reporters embedded with the enemy bother me. Had CNN sent a camera crew to sit with these men and watched them shoot an American, then yeah, I'd be all outraged.

As far as this is concerned? Well, I think unfortunately there is a seriously fundamental mistrust of our media by our military. I don't blame them...a lot of senior officers remember destroying the enemy during the tet offensive only to have Walter Cronkite declare we had lost the war. That kind of thing gets remembered and passed on.

I don't have a problem with showing the videos made by the other side, but I do have a problem with this notion that "objectivity" means we can't contextualize or analyze it. In my opinion, we should be discussing the enemy as much as possible. I think the one thing "both" sides of our political spectrum have in common is that they each think the people on the other side of the argument don't understand the enemy.

We show videos from Osama, right? I agree they're newsworthy, and think they should be discussed. We should be hearing what the enemy's leadership has to say. Most of the people I argue with in the "real" world think that this war will end if we just "understand where he's coming from." I think most of them would change their minds if they really understood.

So if we're willing to show videos from Osama, how far down the line do we not show them? If an insurgent group wants to put together a video of a sniper attack, that's fine with me. I just want to see real analysis after: why snipers? If so many people are really behind their cause, why are they hardly ever to get large groups together? Are they militarily weak? How many firefights have these groups won in the last couple of years? Why is it that foreign fighters make up nearly all of the suicide attacks? Are the indigenous fighters not brave enough to put their lives at risk? Is this due to an institutional fear of Amerian forces?

How often do sniper attacks result in the sniper being killed, either by American counter-snipers, or just superior training of our troops?

I was once party to a non-lethal weapons test where a computer mounted on a humvee could sense a single shot from a sniper, and instantly fire a laser at the sniper that would temporarily blind him, allowing our side to go pick him up.

A majority of the videos made by insurgents that I have seen end with the camera falling down after US troops respond with overwhelmingly superior tactics. I'd like to see those videos on CNN: desperate men fighting a losing war, trying to put together some propaganda to rally their side, only to shriek in terror when they are actually spotted.

These men are cowards, and I think if we're going to show the videos, we might as well talk about the whole story.

Grunt 70

Also I seem to recall some footage, probably shown by CNN, of three insurgents meeting covertly in what they thought was an unobserved field. In comes an Apache with a nose cam, Cannons erupt with fire, scratch three insurgents. Quite graphic, bodies flying etc. And who here hasn't seen over and over again images of Hummers and other coalition vehicles getting blown to bits by IED's?

That said--I have mixed feelings on showing events like these and it doesn't matter to me whether the victims are insurgents or coalition victims. As a society we are so desensitized to violence. Publishing photos and moving images like these must have something to do with that.


I think about WWII an early in the war Life published a photo of dead GI's from Buna, New Guinea. (Google George Strock or Buna and you'll see it) It's a famous photo and you've probably seen it before. As a student of the conflict many years ago I learned about this sad image. Life Magazine published this photo of dead soldiers in New Guinea with specific permission from the president. It started a nationwide controversy. The photo shocked the nation but it also helped firm up the nation's resolve to fight and win the war. Sad to say that in today's world it's rather a run of the mill photo--especially compared to some of the cutting edge war pictures coming out of Iraq and other hot spots around the world. (side bar--see the film "Salvador" with James Woods to explore this issue a bit more. "Flags of our Fathers" deals with this theme too)

I know too much about CNN to think they are trying to sway the nation to a pro war stance and in they just might be trying for the opposite effect. I think the photo from 1943 and the publishing of the CNN video have some very interesting parallels. Why is it acceptable to display enemies getting blown to pieces but not acceptable to watch the same thing happen to our boys? Is it unpatriotic? Does it hurt the war effort to understand the true nature of war?

Just so you know--I haven't seen the video of the sniping...nor am very inclined to go looking for it. I am truly sad for the family. Surely someone out in the heartland is privately dealing with this very public death.

__________________
|TG-22nd|Grunt



"When force is necessary, it must be applied boldly, decisively, and completely. But one must know the limitations of force; one must know when to blend force with maneuver" - Leon Trotsky

Sir_Brass

I'm thoroughly disgusted. I haven't seen the clip, but I don't want to.

Showing such thing sensationalizes warfare.

I believe that showing videos such as these (even of US killing the enemy) is irresponsible of the media. All it does is sensationalize combat and makes something that is deadly serious into mass entertainment.

We're the vulgar masses thirsting for blood in the Roman Arena. The media does us a dis-service by feeding that lust for blood and violence by showing us real footage of such things.

__________________
|TG-Irr|Hiram_Yorik
Games: GRAW, BF2142, Oblivion, FarCry, Empire At War, R6:RVS, KotOR, KotOR2, MW4: Mercs, FEAR (XP)




*Hiss* "Oh...crap!" *BLAM* "I'm down....MEDIC!!"

DirtyLude: "If we kill him and eat his heart, his magic will be ours."

AMosely

In my mind there are two questions here.

1) Is it wrong for CNN (or any media outlet) to show this video? No, and certainly not if its presented in the context of educating a viewer on what is really happening and exactly what a U.S. soldier in Iraq is facing today.

2) Was the showing of this video and/or related coverage part of a CNN election campaign strategy? I would not be the slightest bit surprised if it was. From a media analysis point of view, the Fox equivalent of this would be running more stories on new terror threats to Americans and how republicans are working hard to protect us from these threats. Every editor of every American news outlet has the election on his or her mind right now, and this is influencing the news both conciously and unconciously.

Rincewind

I have no problem with the airing of the video (I have major problems with the guys who recorded it; but we're taking care of them) and I'm of the opinion that the military should be in Iraq until the country is positioned where they can leave.

What deal? Is this another thread about MM conspiracies? Or did you want to really consider media?

Did CNN actively seek out this video? Did they broker a deal with an insurgent group to get the video? You're fixated on the idea that CNN actively sought out this film or maybe endorsed its creation (I'm not surprised that you would think this, I'm just wanting some clarification). I doubt this is the case. Your OP indicated that the footage was sent to them so I'm confused about this deal...

Al Jazeera (arguably the media for the 'other side') already shows insurgent videos with some frequency. They also show videos of American attacks on insurgents (like any other western news outlet does). All of these videos are easily accessible to any one with an internet connection--and on the internet they haven’t been filtered through any sort of media 'agenda'.

I'll accept that Al Jazeera or CNN may have an agenda at displaying these films other than ratings. The broadcast may be set up in a way to pull emotions towards one ideology or another.

What was CNN's goal in airing the video? Was their goal achieved? I don't know, the OP lacks any description of the context for the airing of the film. And with a lack of context, the sandbox will build its own.

__________________
~~ Veritas simplex oratio est ~~
No matter how far a wizard goes, he will always come back for his hat. --T. Pratchett

<---- You know you're getting old when you rely on your forum meta-data to remind you how old you are.

Required Reading for all TG sandboxers

leejo

I'm not fixating on a conspiracy, but isn't it unusual for networks to provide free advertising? I may be wrong but I believe logos like that are usually blurred.

Que est my "OP"?

leejo

I pretty much agree. I don't mind watching US forces open up whoopass but I admit I feel like a voyeur.

Strag

So turn it off.


A Clockwork Orange?

xTYBALTx

For the third time in 24 hours and the second time today, I do as well.

But who cares anyway?

__________________
Current good song: Justice - Stress

Steeler

Depends on the source and the broadcaster. Fair use specifies that one can use a copywrit clip of a certain length for news purposes provided you cite the source either in the audio broadcast or on screen. In this case CNN might be honoring the group's common law copyright claim as a matter of policy, or leaving it on for simple context. It depends on how they came by the footage.

__________________

TheFatKidDeath

A fundamental point. Why is showing a surgical strike right and the other wrong?

__________________
|TG-9th| TheFatKidDeath
"Born to Party, Forced to Work."
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/55640 - Check me out on The Onion
http://www.theonion.com/content/vide...ssfully_avoids - I'm on the local news!

Diceman

Don't forget about Video News Releases.

__________________

[drill][medic][conduct][tg-c1][tpf-c1]
[ma-c2][taw-c1]