In other news, the sun rises in the east.
Pew Research Center released a report yesterday on media coverage and the Iraq war. As Hot Air notes, the drop in media coverage seems to have begun in earnest right after David Petraeus’ report to Congress.
Nowhere was the drop-off in coverage more acute than with the policy debate thread. In January 2007, with the media anticipating a fierce battle over Iraq purse strings between Congress and the White House, the Iraq policy debate alone generated 17% of the coverage. In the first three weeks of March 2008, with no prospect of any significant changes in U.S. policy until at least the November election, that thread is down to 2%.
Pew suggests that along with the 2008 election coverage, the media just flat out couldn’t be bothered to report good news coming from Iraq.
But there is another key reason why the war has virtually disappeared from the headlines and talk shows these days — and that’s the situation inside Iraq itself. The reduction in violence on the ground that began late last year has coincided with a significant decrease in coverage from the war zone as well.
Through the first half of 2007, about half the stories from Iraq examined in a PEJ study were about the continuing drumbeat of daily violence. From July through October, that number fell to a little more than one-third. In November, stories filed from Iraq began to take greater notice of the surge’s success in reducing violence, even as the volume of coverage tapered off, evidence perhaps of the old adage that no news is good news. (So far in 2008, events on the ground in Iraq are accounting for only 2% of the newshole, although any sustained uptick in violence there could once again lead to an increase in coverage.)
The excuse offered in the report is that journalists find it too dangerous to move around and report on the economic and political situation in Iraq. But as Ed Morrissey at Hot Air points out, that problem could be solved if the journalists would embed with the troops.
Of course, they did that at the beginning of the war and the media outlets decided the coverage wasn’t negative enough.
It would be funny if it wasn’t true.
Tags: iraq, John McCain, media, Media Bias
March 27th, 2008
The media has latched on to a inaccurate narrative for Senator McCain. Due to one comment he made about being stronger in matters of foreign policy than economics, and one comment that was intended as a joke; Senator McCain is being portrayed as weak on the economy. The most common jab taken is a criticism about his position on the Bush Tax Cuts. The media may have a field day with this issue when taken out of context. However, if his position is looked at in detail it is consistent and logical. The initial opposition to the tax cuts came from a desire to include spending restains, and his concern about how the tax cuts would be distributed across different economic brackets. Also, he had his own tax cut package that he was pushing at the time that he obviously prefered to the Bush Tax Cuts. Now that he supports making the tax cuts permanent he is being criticized for changing his position. However, circumstances are different, and rolling back tax cuts that have been in place for years acts as a tax increase. Increasing taxes when the economy is sluggish is simply poor economics. Tax increases slow the economy, and while the Bush Tax Cuts may not have been structured exactly how Senator McCain would have liked, basic economic principles show this to be a wise decision.
Also, his initial concern with the bill’s lack of spending restraints clearly was justified. Senator McCain has railed against pork barrel projects for years, and consistently votes against these bills. He also stronly opposes bills that create an unfunded liability that will burden generations to come. Finally, Senator McCain has been a consistent and strong advocate of free trade, even to the point of opposing ethanol subsidies in Iowa which many thought it was political suicide.
On the other hand, Democrat candidates are telling people what they want to hear, but not offerring sound economic solutions. Railing against free trade agreements and arguing for tax increases on ‘the rich’ is not sound economics. Deregulation and low taxes help stimulate an economy, and arguing strongly for significant increases in regulations and taxes may win votes, but won’t help the country’s economy.
Tags: bush tax cuts, economics, economy, John McCain, media, spin, tax cuts
March 7th, 2008
