Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

The Iraq News Black-Out: How the Press Spent Its Summer Vacation

By Eric Boehlert, Media Matters for America. Posted September 5, 2007.


Americans are hungry for news out of Iraq. News directors prefer covering Paris Hilton.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Are the "New Atheists" As Bad as Christian Fundamentalists?
Frank Schaeffer

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
How a Public Jobs Program Could Put America Back on Track
Julianne Malveaux

DrugReporter:
Pot Is More Mainstream Than Ever, So Why Is Legalization Still Taboo?
Steven Wishnia

Environment:
Why We Need Bees and More People Becoming Organic Beekeepers
Makenna Goodman

Food:
The Raw Milk Revolution: Behind America's Emerging Battle Over Food Rights
Makenna Goodman

Health and Wellness:
New York May Stop Heartless Health Insurers from Dropping Coverage When It Stops Being Profitable
William Ehart

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Michelle and Barack's Marriage Has in Common with 56 Million Other Ones
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Eric Boehlert

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Reposted with permission from Media Matters. See original here.

News that Katie Couric would anchor the CBS Evening News from Baghdad this week created a major media splash. After earlier suggesting that type of assignment would be too treacherous for a single mother of two, Couric did an about-face. She stressed that as a journalist she wanted to get a better sense, a firsthand account, of how events were unfolding inside Iraq; to give the story more context.

It's ironic because if CBS had simply aired more reporting from Iraq this summer instead of joining so many other news outlets in walking away from the story, then perhaps Couric wouldn't have had to travel 8,000 miles to find out the facts on the ground.

Couric's high-profile assignment helps underscore the shocking disconnect that has opened up between American news consumers and the mainstream media. The chasm revolves around the fact that public polling indicates consumers are starved for news from Iraq, yet over the summer the mainstream media, and particularly television outlets such as CBS, steadfastly refused to deliver it. The press has walked away from what most Americans claim is the day's most important ongoing news event.

The media's coverage from Iraq has naturally ebbed and flowed over the four-and-a-half years since the invasion. And escalating security concerns in Iraq have made it both more difficult and more expensive for news organization to operate there.

But the pullback we've seen this summer, the chronic dearth of on-the-ground reporting, likely marks a new low of the entire campaign. It's gotten to the point where even monstrous acts of destruction cannot wake the press from its self-induced slumber. Just recall the events of August 14.

That's when witnesses to the four synchronized suicide truck bombs that detonated in northern Iraq on that day described the collective devastation unleashed to being like an earthquake, or even the site of a nuclear bomb explosion; the destruction of one bomb site measured half a mile wide. A U.S. Army spokesman, after surveying the mass carnage from an attack that targeted Yazidis, an ancient religious community, called the event genocidal. Indeed, more than 500 Iraqis were killed, more than 1,500 were wounded, and 400 buildings were destroyed.

The bombings in the towns of Tal al-Azizziyah and Sheikh Khadar marked the deadliest attack of the entire Iraq war. In fact, with a death toll topping 500, the mid-August bombing ranks as the second deadliest terror strike ever recorded in modern times. Only the coordinated attacks on 9-11 have claimed more innocent lives. Yet the press failed to put the story in context.

Early news dispatches about the attacks (which pegged the early death toll at a smaller, but still remarkable, 175) were posted around 6 p.m. ET on August 14. Yet that night on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360, the hour-long news program that airs at 10 p.m., the carnage from Iraq garnered just a brief report, and that was relegated to the "360 Bulletin," halfway through the program; a report on a playground catching on fire due to spontaneous combustion of decomposing wood chips was given slightly more airtime and, unlike the suicide bombings, prompted a reaction from host Cooper himself: "That's incredible. I never heard of that." Less surprising was the fact that a pro-Bush outlet such as The Drudge Report, as late as 10:30 p.m. that night, was ignoring the massive blast headline, or that Fox News gave the gruesome attack just three mentions all evening.

The next day, as noted by the Columbia Journalism Review, the story was placed on A6 in both The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times, and Page 4 of USA Today. On that evening's NBC Nightly News, the historic massacre from Iraq was not even tapped as the day's most important story. (Ongoing mortgage woes led the broadcast that night.)

The media's tepid response to the cataclysmic event was telling. It simply underscored how Iraq fatigue afflicts American newsrooms -- but not American households.

That Americans are obsessed about Iraq is no surprise. Polling has consistently shown they think the war is far and away the single most important issue facing the country. And it wasn't like there was no news happening in Iraq between June and August; the months formed the deadliest summer of the war for U.S. military men and women. To say nothing of the approximately 5,000 Iraqi civilians killed this summer.

Politically, the drastic news withdrawal from Iraq carries deep implications, with the debate about America's role in Iraq due to become even more heated next week as Gen. David H. Petraeus testifies before Congress and the White House produces its report on the status in Iraq. But how are Americans supposed to make informed decisions about this country's future role in Iraq if the mainstream media won't inform the public?

Also, no news from Iraq has usually meant good news for the Bush White House; whenever Iraq has faded from view in recent years, Bush and his policies often received a bump in the polls. For instance, in July, the results from a CBS/New York Times poll raised eyebrows when it found that support for the invasion of Iraq -- which for years had been tumbling -- suddenly experienced an uptick, from 35 to 42 percent.

What's telling is that during the month of July, much of the mainstream media effectively boycotted news from Iraq. Despite sky-high interest among news consumers, stories about the situation in Iraq represented just four percent of the mainstream media's reporting for the month, according to the Project for Excellence in Journalism's News Coverage Index. The index catalogs how much time and space 48 major news outlets devote to various topics each week. The index is broken down by medium: radio, newspapers, online, cable, and network television. (Click here to the see the news outlets monitored by the Coverage Index.)

To put that miniscule 4 percent into perspective: For the month of July, coverage of the fledgling 2008 presidential campaign received nearly three times as much mainstream media news attention as did the unfolding war in Iraq that claimed 79 American lives in July.

In fact, in July Iraq itself rarely ranked among the week's five most-covered stories. And if it weren't for the more robust Iraq reporting that appeared in newspapers and online, events in Iraq probably wouldn't have even ranked among the 10 most-covered stories during the month of July. That's because network and cable television, by contrast, were virtually oblivious to the story.

For instance, over the last seven weeks ABC's Nightline, the network's signature, long-form news program, did not air a single substantive report about Iraq. Not one among the 100-plus news segments the program aired during the stretch was about the situation in Iraq. (That, according to a search of Nightline's transcripts via Nexis.) For instance, on the night after the mammoth suicide bomb blasts in Iraq on August 14, Nightline aired reports about a Mexican stem cell doctor, lullaby singer Lori McKenna, and soccer star David Beckham. That week, Nightline did two separate reports about the earthquake in Peru that killed approximately 500 civilians. But nothing that week from Nightline about the suicide blasts in Iraq that also killed approximately 500 civilians.

Instead of Iraq, here are some of the news stories Nightline staffers devoted time and energy to during that seven-week summer span:

  • The popularity of organic pet food.
  • The favorite songs of Pete Wentz, bassist for the pop/rock band Fall Out Boy.
  • The folding of supermarket tabloid, The Weekly World News.
  • The rise of urban McMansions.
  • The death of the postcard.
  • The commercial battle between Barbie and Bratz dolls.
  • The nerd stars of the movie Superbad.


News consumers remained starved for reports from Iraq

The media's dramatic news withdrawal from Iraq might be justified, on some level, if evidence showed that Americans had grown bored of the war in Iraq. Journalism is a public service but it's also a business and editors and producers are always trying to find the right mix of news that consumers need and news they want to have. If Americans were zoning out Iraq, then why should news outlets try to force-feed updates to news consumers?

But the truth is Americans are borderline obsessed with news from Iraq. And it's the mainstream media that's abdicated their news gathering responsibility.

That stunning disconnect becomes obvious when comparing the PEJ's weekly News Coverage Index with the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press' weekly News Interest Index, a survey "aimed at gauging the public's interest in and reaction to major news events." Pew asks 1,000 adults which story in the news they are following "very closely" that week. The two weekly surveys simultaneously gage which stories news consumers are paying very close attention to and which stories news editors and producers are paying close attention to (i.e. which stories they're covering).

As I mentioned, the disconnect is absolutely shocking when it comes to the situation in Iraq, which as a news story consistently ranked near the top of the News Interest Index this summer, while simultaneously ranking near the bottom of the News Coverage Index.

For instance, at the outset of the summer for the work week of June 24-29, 32 percent of adults were following the situation in Iraq "very closely," but the story represented only 4 percent of that week's news hole -- a 28-point gap.

That same trend played out all summer, with that gap often ballooning:

Click for larger version
(click for larger version)

On average during the summer, 31 percent paid very close attention to the situation in Iraq, making it far and away the hottest news topic throughout the season. Yet on average, the situation in Iraq represented just 4.5 percent of the overall news coverage. No other story, as tracked by the News Interest Index and the News Coverage Index, produced such a consistently wide disparity between June and September.

In other words, week after week a clear plurality of Americans said the situation in Iraq was a story they followed very closely. Yet week after the week much of the mainstream press responded with a so-what shoulder shrug.

And nobody was shrugging their shoulders more often than television news producers, who all but gave up covering the war in Iraq this summer. For the week of August 5-10, for instance, when news consumer interest in Iraq peaked at 36 percent, the story didn't even represent 3 percent of cable television's news hole.

Or this: In the second quarter of 2007 (the most recent quarterly data available from PEJ), MSNBC devoted just 1.5 percent of its overall news coverage to documenting events in Iraq.

But hey, now that Katie Couric has rediscovered Iraq, perhaps the rest of the press will follow.

A footnote: For those who wade through the News Coverage Index data, you'll note a category dubbed "Iraq Policy" which has received lots of mainstream media attention this summer, often topping the News Coverage Index. But that's not to be confused with reporting about the Iraq war itself. Reports about the Beltway debate over Iraq policy are much different than reports about the situation in Iraq. The policy debate has mostly been covered as a horserace: Do Democrats have the votes to end the war? Can Bush still keep anxious Republicans in line? It's what the Beltway press loves to obsess over -- who's up, who's down, and what the 2008 implications are. Americans, though, are more interested in a war, now in its 53rd month, being waged in the Persian Gulf that has claimed nearly 4,000 American lives and is costing the U.S. Treasury $1 billion each week to fight.







Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: media, iraq

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Meeting their Real Customers' Needs
Posted by: EKSwitaj on Sep 8, 2007 1:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When it comes to the mainstream media, journalism is indeed a business, but its customers are not the viewers at home. Rather, the customers are the advertisers. While the interests of advertisers often overlap with that of the viewing audience (since more eyes on the news means more eyes on the ads), it's important to remember that they are not identical. No matter how much people want to learn about the situation in Iraq, they're very unlikely to run out and buy a cheeseburger after hearing about an explosion that killed 500 people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Meeting their Real Customers' Needs Posted by: The Old Hippie
It's not what they say...
Posted by: peacelf on Sep 8, 2007 4:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With the mainstream media it's never been about what they say; it's what they don't say that's important. Those of us who utilize the internet and other news sources already know this, but the reasons for neglect in reporting certain stories goes far beyond war reporting fatigue.

The role of mainstream media in the empire of wealthy corporations is to attract and distract. In other words, get you attention on stories like Paris Hilton, Anna Nicole to distract you from stories like the mounting death toll in Iraq or some corporate malfeasance that might expose the corporate media's own favorable bias toward the wealthy. Such is the state of media in an empire. Indeed, I don't recall hearing the words "empire" or "imperialism" used in the corporate media.

Not even our beloved Keith Olbermann uses these words (that I recall). Nor, have I heard them used on PBS news, one of the few news outlets that provide daily coverage of Iraq and a moment of silence for the fallen soldiers at the end of the program.

Without "imperialism" awareness, news falls into the mundane, another day in america routine. We citizens of the empire walk and talk as if we're any other country any place else in the "free world," when we're anything but. The U.S. is the world's only superpower, and the white male club known as neo-cons at the helm are steering america down the path of total domination, an evil purpose seen only in cartoons like Pinky and the Brain. (Bush, of course, is Pinky and either Cheney or Rove could play the Brain.)

My point is this: we live in an empire and until that awareness and its consequences creeps into the consciousness of nearly ever american, including the so-called journalists who report the mundane, nothing will stop the next president or the one after that, Dem or Repub, from carrying the torch of empire into the next village to pillage and burn.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here's to Big News Media from Americans.....
Posted by: eosrk on Sep 8, 2007 6:13 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
we're tired of the bullshit news you've been giving us for the past seven years or so, which is probably why all your heavy hitters are sinking.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No matter what anyone says or does
Posted by: Constitutionalist75 on Sep 8, 2007 6:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the Cheny/Bush Administration is determined to establish a permanent military base in Iraq to dominate the Middle East together with Israel, but no prime time reporter would end their career to say so, least of all the first woman to anchor a TV news show. The Media and George Bush have the same job - to string the people along with false hopes that a return of their sons and daughters from Iraq is only a few montha away, when in fact U.S. strategy is to rule that region forever by whatever means necessary, including World War Three.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No matter what anyone says or does Posted by: Constitutionalist75
The Bilderbergers are in Control of our/ their Media..
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Sep 8, 2007 9:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We've noticed this, it is everything and anything but Iraq..

That's due to the Bilderbergers controlling our Media, David Rockefeller and the rest those corporate banking fascist swine...

Go ask Wolf Blitzer or Tim Russert.. or Charlie Rose even about the Bilderbergers and watch them freak and cut to a commercial..or dive under the table or bounce off the walls..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

TV News
Posted by: improperly_sedated on Sep 8, 2007 11:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The TV News is neither a public service nor a business. They have already been taken to court on the first point and won when some ethical reporters on the Fox payroll tried to go after Monsanto. We should all know by now that these talking heads are all just PR flacks for their parent corporations. They don't need to make a profit directly, they need to make their bosses look good so that they can make profits elsewhere.

Maybe that's where we can go after them.

Ever since the Dodge brothers sued Henry Ford for having too long range of a business plan, it has been a matter of settled law in the US that for profit corporations must pursue profit above all else, and that ANY MINORITY STOCKHOLDER can demand this, even when it flies in the face of the long term well being of the company.

By giving tabloid crap to a public that wants real news, they are deliberately taking a hit in their ratings and in their revenues.

We just need a little bit of money to buy stock and a whole lot of money for lawyers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

even PBS
Posted by: fg on Sep 8, 2007 2:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was taken aback a couple years ago when Charlie Rose--yes, even he--got bent out of shape when a guest contended the national media is doing the work of big business.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What Do You Know Of APEC
Posted by: Nedtheredhead on Sep 8, 2007 7:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a matter of interest as to what coverage US media gave the recent APEC meeting held in Sydney over the past few days, how many readers know what the conference was about, who attended, what it achieved, what security measures were like, and what do the initials stand for. Your president called it OPEC, how ignorant is the rest of the US?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What Do You Know Of APEC Posted by: vox persona
» RE: What Do You Know Of APEC Posted by: Nedtheredhead
» RE: What Do You Know Of APEC Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: What Do You Know Of APEC Posted by: Nedtheredhead
Something emblematic of the Problem
Posted by: bcgirl125 on Sep 8, 2007 9:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
on Fox News Geraldo show today (sept 8). Geraldo was blabbering with some blond news anchor about a vice principal who left her child to die in a hot car. The interview was being held outdoors, and he and the anchor were completely surrounded by a large group of at least 100 9/11 truthers, yelling and waving signs challenging Geraldo to investigate. But he just ignored them and continued on with the sensationalistic, blame-the-working-mother story. At the end of the interview, Geraldo brushed off the crowd with a segue into the Craig sex story (also grossly over-covered) that went something like, "I bet those people are all interested in a story about bathroom sex!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Something emblematic of the Problem Posted by: Constitutionalist75
Broadcast Journalism is Dead
Posted by: Tom Degan on Sep 9, 2007 7:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can you hear it? Listen Closley....That faint rumbling you hear in the distance is the sound of Edward R. Murrow and Eric Sevareid doing sommersaults in their graves!

It is worth noting that in the run-up to the worst foreign policy blunder in American history, while the corporate media were banging the drums of war, the only news organizations that got the story right (Knight-Ridder for instance) were those which operated outside of the Washington beltway mentality. Independant journalists like Bob Herbert, Greg Palast and the late, great Molly Ivins who tried to light tiny candles of reason in the dark night of mindless nationalism were dismissed as "unpatriotic". Instead of paying attention to the criminal machinations of their government, the foolish American people were happily being spoon fed near lethal doses of info-taining pornography by the likes of FOX Noise. Just look at the result....

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
"The Rant" by Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No wonder the press shitted on Mica when she REFUSED to cover Paris Hilton.
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 9, 2007 7:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But how surprising can that be considering that throughout the summer of 2001, the media was playing goose chase on the Chandra Levy vs Gary Condit BULLSHIT while at the same time, 20 hijackers were preparing for the BIG 9/11 BOMB. You'd think the media motherfuckers would have learned their lessons by then. But why bother to even watch the television when there is no such thing as real news on the tellies these days? Instead of worrying about the tellies getting worse, you'd better make sure the Internet does not become as corrupt or this planet is history for good !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Try living in a red state
Posted by: rk_tech68fl on Sep 9, 2007 11:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...and you'll understand why the media gets away with under-reporting the Iraq war. It is simply a subject that many people are not willing to engage with intellectually. It's a rarity to even meet anyone who reads beyond the local newspaper...a source which is nothing more than a forum for local squabbles and conservative/libertarian apologists. They walk away pumped up with rightwing boilerplate thinking they are informed, then dial up 'Hannity radio' or O'Reilly TV for affirmation. I have to disagree that people want more coverage on Iraq when it's obvious many want delusion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Try living in a blue state Posted by: bcgirl125
Corporate Medium
Posted by: frank69 on Sep 9, 2007 12:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anyone who depends upon television for NEWS, isn't playing with a full deck! Walter Cronkite said the same thing more than 40 years ago. In the sixties, Newton Minnow, a member of the FCC, called television "A vast wasteland." It has gotten worse, much worse. It's hard to believe, but, in fact, WE the PEOPLE actually OWN the AIRWAVES! Look it up!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Corporate Medium Posted by: Tom Degan
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement