Behind the News

PEJ Study Won’t End Partisan Bickering…

But it does reinforce our belief that there isn’t enough coverage of the troops in Iraq

• Print
• Email
• Comments
• Single page

While it is unlikely to change anyone’s mind about what stories the press should cover in Iraq, or the endless, politicized criticisms from the right over “biased” reporting on the war, the Project for Excellence in Journalism released a study this morning of more than 1,100 Iraq stories from January through October by forty different news outlets.

As we’ve seen in other studies the amount of coverage of events on the ground in Iraq—particularly coverage of what American troops are doing on a day-to-day basis—could be better. Much better. Almost 47 percent of the stories that ran in the first ten months of this year focused on daily violence—suicide bombings, car bombings, bodies dumped in the street—that have recently declined dramatically. And those stories, according to PEJ, were straight pieces of reporting about the violence, and as such drew no larger conclusions about the incident, or how it fits into the overall picture of what is happening in Iraq.

The other half of the coverage, or 53 percent of the stories, dealt with U.S. activities in Iraq. And here’s where critics of the media’s work will have a field day. Only 0.5 percent of those stories focused on “U.S. Soldiers Helping People,” with the same percentage given to “Iran’s Involvement” in Iraq. That’s a remarkably small number, given the good work that the troops are doing when and where they can, and the evidence that Iran is helping arm and fund various elements inside Iraq.

Taking the big picture into account, one of the most striking findings of the study was the paltry coverage Iraq has been given in general:

From January through June, coverage from Iraq made up 8% of all the stories (and 7% of the newshole) in the Project’s ongoing index of news coverage. From July through September, coverage from Iraq made up 5% of the stories (representing 5% of the newshole). The numbers spiked back up in October to 7% of all stories.

War coverage fell from a pathetic 8 to 5 percent mostly due to a decline in the amount of coverage of daily violence, PEJ states. “Through June, 51% of all the stories focused on the issue of continuing violence. From July through October, that number fell to 38%.” While we surely all agree that the daily violence, and its recent diminishment, is a story that needs to be covered, it would be nice if reporters started covering what the 160,000-plus American troops are doing there on a daily basis, too.

CJR

If you enjoy this kind of press criticism please consider a subscription to our magazine, Columbia Journalism Review—a deal via the Web site at $19.95.

To subscribe, to give CJR as a gift, to renew, or to check student and CJR in the Classroom rates, click here.

Comments

padikiller

Wed 19 Dec 2007 04:21 PM

Nearly two thirds of the "professional journalists" in Iraq state that they get local stringers to do "all or most" of their legwork...

And furthermore... These "professional journalists" don't venture more than three measely miles from the Green Zone...

It is hardly surprising to find that coveraqe of the war is thus a tad bit lacking...

You can't cover a war properly from the piano bar at the Baghdad Sheraton...

AhmNee

Thu 20 Dec 2007 12:01 PM

Who's fault is that? People like Michael Yon have been reporting that the military in Iraq are making it ever increasingly difficult to embed and anyone who even looks like they could be American has a tendancy to disappear off the streat and show up later blindfolded on a videotape later.

Journalism is a risky profession at times, certainly, but I don't expect journalists to be completely suicidal.

AhmNee

Thu 20 Dec 2007 12:04 PM

Scratch that last 'later' in the first paragraph.

pmcleary

Thu 20 Dec 2007 12:46 PM

For what it's worth, although journalists live within a couple miles of the Green Zone, once you're out those gates, it doesn't matter if you're 50 yards or 5 miles. The neighborhoods they live in are no picnic.

Also, I'm heading back to Iraq in late January, and I had no problem getting embedded.

padikiller

Thu 20 Dec 2007 03:52 PM

Of course journalism in a war is dangerous...

But, journalists can't have it both ways.

They can't hang out in the hotel bar in Baghdad, relying on locals to do their jobs for them, and then also honestly expect their readers to believe that they are getting good coverage of the war..

Of course, there are many safe areas in Iraq outside of the Green Zone (notably just about the entirety of Kurdistan) but there is no denying the fact that in general Iraq is a dangerous place... For anybody...

That's why they call it a "war zone" instead of a "play zone" or a "party zone"...

AhmNee

Fri 28 Dec 2007 03:59 PM

But ... but ... John McCain said it was safe. It's okay to take a stroll in the streets and sample the local cuisine.

Sure it's dangerous for "anyone" but the chances for a Caucasian walking down the streets of Baghdad seem to be a bit worse than your average Iraqi.

You also make it sound like a journalist can't give good coverage of an event unless they were an eye witness. How often does that happen? That the reporter was there when the event covered actually happened. That would be what interviewing witnesses if for.

So, speaking of having it both ways ... which is it, Padi? One moment you tout the dramatic reduction in violence and casualties that show the surge has worked ... the next you preach how the zone really is dangerous.

Saying the "surge" worked is the same sort of whitewash they used to say they were ending the surge and starting to bring troops home. The violence is only back to the levels we started with at the beginning of the occupation and the troops are coming home because they can't keep them there any longer. The military already extended the tours of duty for our beleaguered soldiers and their tours are at an end. There simply aren't more soldiers to throw into the 'warzone' without extending their tours again, a move which was highly unpopular the first time.

It's all smoke and mirrors.

padikiller

Sun 30 Dec 2007 09:57 AM

AhmNee Babbles Another Fairy Tale

Sure it's dangerous for "anyone" but the chances for a Caucasian walking down the streets of Baghdad seem to be a bit worse than your average Iraqi.

padikiller responds

Where in the Hell did you come up with this load of crapola?

There is no question that the "surge" is working exceedingly well....

Not only Harry Reid, but even Jack Murtha, have had to publicly acknowledge this unpleasant reality....

And the fact that the surge has rendered Iraq safer and more secure does not mean that the war is over...

Finally, you can't do real journalism by relying on local stringers to do your job for you. Doing so allows our enemies to plant propaganda in our press...

Bilal Hussein, who is accused of conspiring with terrorists, even as he photographed them.

Jamil Hussein, a rougue policeman presented as an official source by the AP, and who promulgated the "burned Sunnis" fairy tale...

"Anonymous officers" who reported the "discovery" of twenty beheaded bodies.

"Scott Thomas" and his silly "Shock Troops" stupidity....