On what I thought was my last day in the Army in May 2007, my battalion commander gave me some parting words of discouragement. “I just want you to understand that you’re leaving the most respected profession in America for one of the least,” he said. It was his final attempt to dissuade me from pursuing a career in journalism.
“Roger, sir,” I whispered.
The Army was in the midst of a crisis, and he was angry. Junior officers were bailing at an accelerating rate. Some were disenchanted with the deteriorating situation in Iraq; others were attracted by high-paying civilian jobs. For weeks my commander had been urging me to stay. But my mind was made up.
He shook his head and tightly crossed his arms. “If you ever happen to write about the military, just remember where you came from,” he said. “Don’t dishonor us.” And with that, I was dismissed.
Complete access to this article will soon be available for purchase. Subscribers will be able to access this article, and the rest of CJR’s magazine archive, for free. Select articles from the last 6 months will remain free for all visitors to CJR.org.
I feel for this person. Our Quaker meeting tonight mentioned this situation of his. I hope this publication is of help to him, and perhaps gets response from some of us who feel a wish for him to know he has support in his pursuit of his personal goals.
Posted by Robert Cooper on Sun 26 Jul 2009 at 09:39 PM
Matt; just what happens when you tell the truth to, or about, power like the US military?
Refuse deployment and find out. Investigate the lies that caused perhaps the most brutal invasion in American history.
You cannot serve two masters.
Posted by Alice de Tocqueville on Mon 27 Jul 2009 at 09:58 AM
Matt: A very sensitive view of the Army and the futility of the Iraq War. I felt much the same about 40 years ago when I returned to the university after Viet Nam. I hope you will soon be able to pursue your journalism career.
Posted by Bill Hierstein on Mon 27 Jul 2009 at 01:44 PM
Matt, I have to disagree with you. Journalists and military people are not the same. "Whether they wield rifles or pads and pens", like you say, makes all the difference. We don't have guns and we don't kill people to defend our ideals, which are common to many professions. I realize you are going for an abstract comparison but I think it's impossible to do such a thing.
Also, I agree with your professor, you should stay away from covering the military. You can't possibly have the critical distance needed to do an unbiased job.
Good luck in the Middle East and I hope you return home safely very soon.
Posted by Laura Davis on Mon 27 Jul 2009 at 07:01 PM
My son recently graduated from West Point, class of 2008. During his time at the US Military Academy, the Cadets were encouraged to get information from all types of press, including military unfriendly networks that were against the Bush administration, such as NPR, MSNBC, and CNN. Things might have changed in the few short years since Matt graduated.
Posted by Al R from Madison NJ on Tue 28 Jul 2009 at 03:34 AM
Matt, learn maintenance and then come talk to me. Oh wait, that was Kadel.
I too have become a bit disillusioned with the military after my recent deployment, but less for the reasoning behind why we are in Iraq (international law supports our presence there, but that is best left for another article) and more in the waste and abuse of tax payer's money.
This is a very interesting article, especially having served with you in Ramadi and engaged in (sometimes) semi-intellectual conversations about the future of the military and America. Well done, Matt. Stay safe in Afghanistan.
Posted by Dave on Tue 28 Jul 2009 at 08:18 AM
Matt, It is scary to me to think that there is still so much prejudice against veterans. Already in the comments I see it, and I hope you defend us any chance you get. Being a vet I really feel like a minority, and feel the most positive emotions people can give is to feel sorry for me having to be deployed. When my father returned from Vietnam, he chose to live in Europe for 11 years before returning to the US. When he did, and applied for jobs in NYC and NJ he was told not to put any of his six years of military service on his resume as it would make him LESS competative for the job. 2 Bronze stars, a company command, none of it means anything? We dont live in those times anymore, but as things go on it could turn out that way. I do think Journalists are different in that they are always so indifferent. In the Army we learn how to care for and love our fellow man just as much as we learn to fight them. You FEEL every time you see another casualty, another deployment, another bomb explosion, another homeless vet, another kid on the street. I think thats more than most Americans can say. Make sure you let them know that.
Posted by Luke on Tue 28 Jul 2009 at 11:04 AM
Matt,
Good luck on your deployment. I just returned from Afghanistan last spring serving with a number of other IRR recalled officers. You seem to be a pretty well grounded professional and I hope that you are able to maintain your professionalism during this involuntary recall. I've seen first hand how a number of IRR recalls were extremely bitter at getting deployed again. I can't say that I blame them, but it certainly hurt the morale and the discipline of the soldiers they were responsible for leading. It's an unfortunate situation all around. I applaude your choice of becoming a journalist. While you may not relish the attitudes or stereotypes your journalistic peers place upon American soldiers, I believe your prior service provides you with a unique perspective and an objective voice for those who are BOG implementing America's foreign policy.
I look forward to reading your work in the future. Good luck in the 'Stan!
Posted by OEF Vet on Tue 28 Jul 2009 at 01:20 PM
Matt,
I feel that each of us has a calling you have had two very strong ones in your life. I hope that while being deployed again brings them both together.
I have been supporting deployed troops since early 04 and had your unit back in 06, I met such wonderful soldiers in that unit, some that changed my life. A few that still email and write me even now, once they are home, I find that amazing.
I thank you ALL for what you do to ensure our freedoms. I take none of it lightly and never will.
I will keep you all in my thoughts and prayers and know that I am more than willing to support this unit you are with now.
Take care and God bless you
Kelley Granzow
Posted by Kelley on Tue 28 Jul 2009 at 03:15 PM
What in the world does "unbiased" even mean? To actually believe that any person can report "objectively" is to believe they don't let their own personal experiences effect how they perceive reality. This is exactly why journalism has nothing but hollow arguments against blogging.
Matt, hope you return safely. Despite my thoughts on your second profession, I do appreciate what you're trying to do and good luck.
Posted by James on Tue 28 Jul 2009 at 05:23 PM
Hi Matt, as an German Army captain (reserve) , with 10 years in the Airborne Infantry and 2 years in PsyOps who´s now working in PR, I felt (and still feel) a similar clash of cultures - just tripled (Army, PR, Journalism). I think you´re right with your observations, but maybe you want to look at it from another angle, too. As with PR, Journalism tends to overstate the power of military propaganda. While indeed the US are at the forefront of communication strategies such as embedding, the "truth" is, that the claimed superiority of "the other side" is often an excuse for not researching properly. As you experienced, it is easier to make fun of people, than to really unfold their state of mind. If the photographer, that gave the lecture, had had a real interest in his object of reporting, he might have come up with an even more compelling story, eg. why some of the - probably less intellegent - kids had joined the Army, etc. He decided to go the easy way and settled for cynicism - as soldiers do sometimes (Maybe you have seen videos of Marines mocking children in AFG). Maybe you can ease that up, and span the boundaries between those cultures. Danger is, you might find yourself in opposition to your government.
Posted by Sascha Stoltenow on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 06:49 AM
Matt,
Don't listen to the few self-righteous, pretentious blowhards who discourage you from your calling. Your future editors will decide if you are right for a military assignment; alternatively you can freelance. Besides, their hero Glenn Greenwald and others have exposed the 'detachment' and 'objectivity' charades for what they are: the big lie in journalism.
Don't doubt that your perspective on war and its effect on warriors and on the people in the countries where we make war will be immensely valuable to almost any publication as well as to the American polity when you return safely home. Trust your own instincts to guide you, both on your tour and when you resume your career. Don't let anything but your own heart dissuade you from your mission of service. Godspeed.
Posted by Mike on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 07:56 AM
I am surprised that Matt didn't use the term SERVICE. Both the military and the press embody (albeit in VERY different ways) service to the greater community. The military serves the country by potecting it from all enemies, foreign and domestic), and the press serves the country by providing a source of information separate from the government; the Constitution is clear on the importance of a free, and independent press.
As a currently serving Army officer who has served in Iraq, my best wishes go out to Matt the soldier, and as a proud citizen of the US I look forward to reading Matt the reporter's work when he returns to resume his second career.
Posted by Mike in DC on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 10:44 AM
Matt,
Great article. I believe a key toward resolving most conflicts is to "walk in the other's shoes," which you have done for your readers. This article is going to be one of the readings in my Military Ethics classes--which can devolve into press-bashing sessions. Stay safe brother!
Posted by Chappy on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 11:05 AM
Dear Laura Davis,
You are fool if you think your colleagues in the media are unbiased and objective. Maybe you live on Mars?
Frankly, I trust Matt Mabe to get the story right a lot more than you or one of those journalists who you mistakenly think write with out any bias. Because at least he knows what he's talking about.
RJS
Posted by RJS on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 11:57 AM
I swear the lefty mind never develops beyond it's freshman college year...
Posted by wnaegele on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 04:45 PM
"We don't have guns and we don't kill people to defend our ideals."
Sometimes a pen is sharper than a sword, and is even deadlier than conventional weapons! "Words" can and will be able to kill people, given the wrong motives.
Posted by tx_viet on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 05:00 PM
"Frankly, I trust Matt Mabe to get the story right a lot more than you or one of those journalists who you mistakenly think write with out any bias. Because at least he knows what he's talking about."
--- So, the ONLY way anyone can learn what's going on in Iraq is to enlist in the US military?
And the ONLY people in Iraq who actually know what's going on are soldiers?
Posted by Hardrada on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 06:35 PM
Amazing story, Matt. You are a brave person not only for your military service but your willingness to follow your instincts and go into journalism. Stay safe.
Posted by wyoaalex on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 07:02 PM
Matt,
Your conflict with your experiences between the army and Journalism school are illuminating, as I suspect you have already seen. Both seem to misunderstand the other. You have the perspective to make sure the neither are diminished, but kept in their proper perspective - you have that unique experience to know where the truth lies. You may think (or thought) that you were too close to the military perspective, but you've also seen that many of your journalism peers are to far away. They need your perspective, else they de-humanize those they cover.
Do not ever be ashamed of your service, no matter what your peers and mentors say. It was callous of your professor to make that recommendation, You had the more complete perspective; she seemed to mistake impartiality for ignorance.
FCCS(SW/AW) Jeff Weimer, USN
Posted by Jeff Weimer on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 07:04 PM
--- So, the ONLY way anyone can learn what's going on in Iraq is to enlist in the US military?
And the ONLY people in Iraq who actually know what's going on are soldiers?
Posted by Hardrada on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 06:35 PM
No. But it helps. :) Also, the person you responded to was a lot less absolute than you. They said "a lot more" rather than "only". Relax, take a deep breath. It's okay.
Speaking from someone on the inside (of the Navy anyway), he can recognize certain things that may require further investigation that even the most hard-boiled never-military journalist would miss.
The only people who know what's going on in Iraq are Soldiers? Not necessarily. But you'd find out much more about what's going on within the forces there by gaining the confidence of the NCOs. They're professionals - they pay attention to those things. They're life literally depends on it, so you can depend on their opinion, for the most part.
Posted by Jeff Weimer on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 07:16 PM
Gosh, Matt, what a surprise that you would encounter so many devout leftists at Columbia J School. That they hate the military is no secret and nothing new. They feel for all you "poor boys" who had no other choice in life, but to serve your country. They have no understanding of honor and service. For God's sake, when you return safely, find another profession. Journalism is so over as the media is nothing more than a vehicle for the left's talking points. Look at the demise of newspapers and the ever falling ratings of the network news shows. Get a real job, Matt, and leave the J School weenies to prance and preen while their careers sink into oblivion.
Posted by Joanne Jones on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 07:23 PM
Matt,
I spent more than a quarter century as a reporter and editor, and I'd have been happy to have someone with your background, insights, and talents work with me. The professor who said you should not be covering military issues is an utter idiot -- and has no business practicing journalism because she's letter who own personal political views interfere with her obligations as a teacher.
Posted by Frank on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 07:25 PM
Matt,
I did a good tour in the military. Basically, I found that this nation isn't worth defending. I'm bitter towards my service. I liked the job. But our modern nation with the Obamas, Reids, Pelosis, the freckless media, the "give-me" culture of entitlement, and a host of other items have convinced me of one thing: our military is better than any one of the worthless b**tards we defended.
Posted by Bill H on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 07:37 PM
Laura Davis -
I don't know which is more amusing, your belief that journalists are not biased or your belief that Afghanistan is in the Middle East.
Posted by Mark James on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 08:16 PM
Matt,
Thank you for your service in the military and the courage to follow the oaths you took in going back in Afghanistan.
Posted by Jim on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 08:29 PM
The only people who know what's going on in Iraq are Soldiers? Not necessarily. But you'd find out much more about what's going on within the forces there by gaining the confidence of the NCOs. They're professionals - they pay attention to those things. They're life literally depends on it, so you can depend on their opinion, for the most part.
Posted by Jeff Weimer on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 07:16 PM
We aren't talking merely about having an opinion, we're talking about having an purely objective, unbiased opinion. I see no reason to believe that the fact that someone is a professional soldier would make it more likely that they'd have an unbiased opinion.
My brother served in Iraq for 18 months with the National Guard, and predictably, his opinion on Iraq is not objective.
I question the logic behind this notion that journalists, on principle, are always biased while on the other hand professional soldiers, on principle, are always objective, because "their lives depend on them paying attention."
We all have axes to grind, so let's stop pretending this is a unique characteristic that only journalists have.
Posted by Hardrada on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 08:41 PM
Soldier Turned Journalist Finds Contempt for Military Among Classmates, Teachers
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/clay-waters/2009/07/29/soldier-turned-journalist-finds-contempt-military-among-classmates-teac
Posted by StewartIII on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 08:51 PM
Matt, I found it ironic that you worry that your military experience might affect your reporting. You worry about being an unbiased reporter. Yet, the media have no problem displaying their anti-military bias. You yourself report on their horribly biased views of the military. Even worse, the media is not grateful to the military for defending their freedom to write anti-military stereotypical drivel. It seems to me, Matt, that CJS has brainwashed you. You need distance from the military to write 'unbiased' reports; they have no experience at all and openly disdain. Is that the distance you need to get, Matt? Do you need to make the move from appreciation to disdain in order to be a 'good' reporter? I think you need the time in the military to give you distance from your CJS programming to help you realize what a bunch of crocks journalists are, which is why the MSM is tanking.
Posted by Alexis de Tocqueville on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 09:28 PM
Matt, don't let the bastards get you down. I too left the military and am now working in a predominantly Leftist environment. I use the word Left because liberals would be open minded enough to want to learn about what they don't understand. But the Left in both of our professions need to stereotype and denigrate soldiers because they know that they are not as good as us. All of the soldiers that I have ever served with are much more valuable to me and the country than some idiot who mocks them in such an unknowing and safe environment.
Have that photographer show up again, and you know that he would be kissing the ass of every soldier that helped to keep him alive. Even if he isn't worth it.
Posted by Steve in MT on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 09:38 PM
No bias in journalism?
From which school did Daren Briscoe get his degree?
How much bias did he show while covering Obama in the primaries?
And who is his current boss?
How about some unbiased research on that as well as the media's coverage of Obama as a whole?
No wonder news outlets are suffering and are looking for a federal bailout.
Hey journalists, do your job, tell the whole story, like it is, ugly bits an all, leave your fan club print to in-house e-mails..until you do that, you are partisan hacks and deserve to fold under.
Posted by G on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 09:59 PM
No bias in journalism?
From which school did Daren Briscoe get his degree?
How much bias did he show while covering Obama in the primaries?
And who is his current boss?
How about some unbiased research on that as well as the media's coverage of Obama as a whole?
No wonder news outlets are suffering and are looking for a federal bailout.
Hey journalists, do your job, tell the whole story, like it is, ugly bits an all, leave your fan club print to in-house e-mails..until you do that, you are partisan hacks and deserve to fold under.
Posted by G on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 10:00 PM
Posted by Hardrada on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 08:41 PM
That's not the point I'm trying to make. I'm not saying the guys on the ground don't have an opinion, they do - and should.
I'm also not proposing that anyone has an unbiased POV - that's impossible. But journalists are commonly required to exhibit that in the expression of their craft. It would be helpful for a correspondent to have some familiarity with his subject. From Matt's essay, there is little of that from his peers, Isn't that sad?
FCCS(SW/AW) Jeff Weimer, USN
Posted by Jeff Weimer on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 10:13 PM
So anyone with a military background should not cover military operations because of questionable objectivity. Does that mean that all pacifists, all Green Peace members, all leftists, all Code Pink members and supporters, and maybe even anyone who watches MSNBC are unfit to serve as journalists in Iraq? Looking at today's journalists, who does have any true objectivity and no preconceived bias?
Posted by samuel zuckerman on Wed 29 Jul 2009 at 11:06 PM
Matt
I doubt it's likely you can make it this far down this comment section, but if by chance you do - well said, well done, and indeed, illegitimi non carborundum.
Posted by Greyhawk on Thu 30 Jul 2009 at 01:22 AM
Matt,
Thank you for this piece; the juxtaposition of cultures here is fascinating to read about. As a civilian, I feel ashamed that half of the comments to your article are trying to use it as some sort of evidence for poorly-thought-out political commentary on either side or as a launch pad for fauxlisophical single-sentence replies using big words as if they make any kind of point about society. Many of the friends I grew up with have since joined the military, and seeing this happen feels like watching them come home only to be subjected to the constant "did you kill anyone - this is what I think - don't you think my opinions are right?" progression of conversation so many people invariably inflict on them.
The nature of objectivity everyone seems to be stuck on here not withstanding, your lack of bias in this particular article was refreshing; I do not believe you are a slave to either of your careers to the point where one will suffer if you've got a mindset that allows you to discuss sour notes in both of them instead of convieniently forgetting them. My own view of journalism is less than positive; as a profession based in a for-profit business, it will ultimately always be influenced by decisions that guarantee more of said profit, but people like you with the common sense to pay attention to the world going on around you instead of settling for easy, reality-warping black and white explanations are the kind of journalists that keep the media from being another form of advertising in its entirety. Quite a few people just wouldn't have the conversation with your commanding officer the way you did, and it has nothing to do with being in the military or not. Society in the western world suffers greatly for the way need for approval from those around us influences our behavior on a day to day basis, and you have more guts than you realize for simply refusing to be ashamed about your choices in the face of disapproval. This is bar none one of the best qualities you can have as a soldier, a journalist, and a human being.
Thank you for fighting the good fight, both with a sword and a pen. Stay safe.
Posted by A Solomon on Thu 30 Jul 2009 at 01:42 AM
Does it really suprise anyone about the description of the photojournalist's views and descriptions of servicemembers? It shows a lack of class and honor in mocking and ridculing people not around to defend themselves and it reinforces my belief that the media has only disdain and predudice against the military. It strikes me as hypocritical that the media rails against stereotyping yet induldge in it themselves when it comes to those that serve. The media is just a bunch of ideolouges hinding behind "objectivity."
Posted by Mitch on Thu 30 Jul 2009 at 02:04 AM
Matt, Welcome back to the real brotherhood. Real journalist like Michael Yon get in there with the military and report the truth, unlike what we have today. They make fun of the military because deep down they know they are cowards.
Someday the truth will come out, the mass graves will be shown (Women, Children in one pit, Men in the other. Thank you Saddam). Journalist a profession with less respect then congress!
Posted by Sean on Thu 30 Jul 2009 at 05:54 AM
The professors and students mentioned in this story will probably not bother to read it or mock it. There is such a huge disconnect between those in the media, journalism schools, and newspapers and those who actually work for a living in the military and 'fly over country'.
It is almost as if the United States has become schziophrenic in its dual system of values. One set of values held by the leftist media types is that religion, military, patriotism, and morals are something to be rejected and destroyed. And the other set of values held by the other half of the country which reflexively loves America, does understand why marriage has to be destroyed as an institution, and thinks serving in the military is an honor not a burden of the underclass.
Posted by Dis Appointed on Thu 30 Jul 2009 at 09:40 AM
Matt,
I'm a 1998 Naval Academy grad who has walked your path (minus the recall back to duty). See www.danelo.com
I wrote a piece called "Stop Blaming the Press" in January '08 that you would appreciate. It is under the "writing" tab of my Web site.
Feel free to drop me a note. And keep an eye out for C.J. Chivers. He's a good man. DD
Posted by David Danelo on Thu 30 Jul 2009 at 04:52 PM
No one is forced to join the military, let's not forget it's not mandatory in this country, like it is in others. So no one "has" to be deployed, these are consequences of personal choices. I think Matt understands that this is all about choices.
It's dissapointing to see this comment section has turned into a military fan page and support group.
Posted by Doug Middleton on Thu 30 Jul 2009 at 05:44 PM
Matt, the same self-centered, sanctimonious types you ran across in journalism school are fairly common place throughout academia. As a working class woman who went back to school later in life, I can assure you, they are as bigoted and condescending to anyone who doesn't conform to their narrow world view. Don't give up your dreams of covering the war, our troops, and I count a god son among them deserve truly honest coverage from reporters who respect them, and hold fast to journalistic integrity, something that is all too rare these days, unfortunately. I can't count one reporter these days who honors the obligation to report in the public interest. The bias is on their part, and I include that professor who advised you so poorly.
Laura Davis, sorry, but no, journalists and the military are not different. They are human beings, irregardless of their profession or military service. Spare me the ponce about journalists not killing people to defend your ideals.. frankly, for two decades, the vast majority of reporters have been killing innocent people each and every day, with their greed and indifference. Not for them high minded journalistic standards, rather, they serve their own selfish, self-serving interests. Cite one example where a current reporter has put any time into investigative journalism regarding the attempted economic genocide being committed against working poor and middle class Americans? Don't even try and brush that aside, as we now have tent cities in each of the fifty states, in all your respective back yards. We have homeless veterans living under bridges, on the street, treated disgracefully, even by democrat elected officials who feign commitment to so called human rights considerations. Obama, just a few months back was trying to steal VA services away from our veterans and troops, because he doesn't respect the obligation we have towards our brave servicemen and women, nor do you it seems, or those callous, elitist snobs in academia or in the press. No more than Bush did. What I have learned is, irregardless of whether it's far right, or far left wing, the outcome is the same damned thing.. you're all fascists. In decades past, real journalists who reported in war zones, many of them were veterans as well. They loved their country, and respected the service men and women whose service they witnessed first hand. You and yours lack the critical distance to honestly comprehend and report on the realities faced by our troops, or frankly anything else. Your bias, prejudices and agenda are what you're interested in serving. I rather doubt that you are capable of grasping what that means.
Posted by Mary on Thu 30 Jul 2009 at 06:02 PM
Self indulgent bull corn.
Posted by WhamProd on Thu 30 Jul 2009 at 06:04 PM
May you be safe in Afghanistan and may you return to a profession that I love enough to have taught it for 30 years. As a mother and now grandmother in these perilous times, I am thankful for men and women like you who will answer the call to serve in the armed forces.
I hope you know many people in this country whose voices you will never hear, whose names you will never know appreciate the sacrifice that you and your family and the others whom you serve with are making so that people can write their opinions [supportive, critical, rude or hostile or pleasant] and speak their minds aloud.
Those of us in the heartland of the USA may not agree with everything that goes on in Washington, but we DO support the people in the military. May you go with God and return safely. I will pray for you specifically as I pray for the safety of our military heroes.
Posted by Marcia in Oklahoma on Thu 30 Jul 2009 at 11:38 PM
Thank you for your dedication and for beng honest about your experiences whether postiive or negative. It helps to have those who have served like you address and remark on what the majority of Americans at a respected university might think about the military and why those who serve do so. In my opinion, stepping up to the plate, sacrificing your life for your country and your fellow man is THE MOST HONORABLE FOLLOWING a man/woman can choose.
I hope to hear further reporting whether it be blogging or writing for any purpose.
Posted by Ty in Dallas on Fri 31 Jul 2009 at 01:26 AM
James, I agree with you on what you say about the term "biased" being an unrealistic exception upon someone. I've always felt claiming to be unbiased is a bit like claiming to be a robot. Personally I would rather hear a person speak from the heart and from their personal experience.
Helen
Brainwave Entrainment
Posted by Helen on Fri 31 Jul 2009 at 12:42 PM
Laura,
You agree with his professor that he cannot do an unbiased job, yet you base that, like her, on nothing more than his not liking a clearly biased journalist. If you want to see who can't cover the military without bias, it's the kind of hateful journalists like the one who presented to his class.
With attitudes like yours littering the profession, no wonder journalism is so little respected today.
Posted by Brian Garst on Sat 1 Aug 2009 at 02:05 AM
Matt,
Perhaps it is just me, but I am rather disappointed by the lack of true professionalism that permeates American journalism (at least as far as the main media is concerned). I am not convinced that the level of professional and ethical formation that both you and I received at West Point can be imitated by any educational institution of journalism in America. Having attended Columbia School of Journalism and West Point, you are in a better position to judge my conclusion. However, as a member of the audience, I judge by the media’s fruit. It has been said many times that true journalism is dead in America. I can assure that true military self-less service to this nation is not. See you next time you’re back in the main land.
Jose.
Posted by Jose Garcia on Sun 2 Aug 2009 at 11:48 PM
May God Bless you Matt.
I've always been of the opinion that things happen for a reason. Whether it be you get a lazy day fishing on the bijou or you are forced back into harm's way. Its good to know that, when all is said and done, there will be an honest voice to be heard.
Lots of folks were in awe by the move the US made in Iraq. When things went sour, so did the awe. Being sour, however, does not solve any problems - especially when you are too sour too late (as was the "dark period" in American Journalism).
Someone has to put the US gov. in check, and the only people to really do it is the people themselves. If the voices of the masses are being ignored by the few that are making the decisions, then we really do not have a democracy. However if the voices are not speaking up soon enough, then we definitely will have to speak over the sound of gunfire and bombshells to be heard.
Perhaps the action taken by the government was so swift after 9-11 that folks were still in shock to really be of sound mind to have a reasonable judgement of the aftermath. Were we all silently mourning while the country was swept into the liberation of Iraq? I was in opposition to the invasion personally, but I also did not take any action to prevent it. Once it had began - I had no choice but to support my country as I am an American. I support the military's efforts no matter if they are smeared by some chump that lacks the ability to consider the experiences and scenerios of others that chose to put themselves on the alter of freedom and fight - to fight for the liberty of those very chumps.
Like it or not, we are still at war with the same s.o.b.'s that flew those planes and passengers into the WTC, Pentagon, and the ground. As long as there is a Taliban, we (the US) will be at war. The least we can do is support those that are fighting no matter where they may be - and hope for a swift end to it for the wish of better times.
God Bless.
Aaron
Posted by Aaron L. Smith on Sat 8 Aug 2009 at 01:18 PM
Sir,
What is the blog address you and your wife have? I want to send it to my son and daughter-in-law.
My son recently went back into the military. He was an Air Force enlisted MP for four years in the 90s. Got out. Got married. Had a child. Became an RN. He missed the military so recently he went back as a 1LT. The military is a calling for him - and he understands its shortcomings.
And I know him - he will (may already have) volunteered for Afghanistan.
I was drafted and sent to Vietnam for a year (I am 65). Things are so different. So much different.
Jack Kephart
Huntsville, Alabama
Posted by Jack Kephart on Sun 9 Aug 2009 at 08:39 PM
Wow, this was food for thought. As regards "objectivity:" I've worked with refugees from the Bosnian war, as well as for the PfP of NATO, but my profs did not think that I handed over my brain during my graduate studies. Did I have doubts about attending courses on the wars in Yugoslavia and peace support operations? Yes. Did I have to bite my tongue repeatedly and choke back anger? Yes. But things worked out... most of the time. Do not be discouraged by doubters of your "objectivity" or journos taking cheap shots at the military's rank and file, while failing to cover the deficiencies of their political and military leaders. Galivanting through foreign countries and feeling important, as well as gullibly copying everything your beltway-cronies feed you seems to be the height of journalistic standards for most journalists. On the other hand, the military has its rotten apples also, from incompetents, to war criminals to "media managers." You have chosen to live in both worlds, that's a legitimate choice and folks will have to live/deal with it. Stick to your guns/pens, etc. and good luck.
Posted by Sylvia Misik on Tue 11 Aug 2009 at 05:51 AM
As a veteran, I understand the issues he is dealing with, though I would offer him perhaps a more constructive way to think about his seemingly disparate career choices. It seems to me that there is a scarcity of real journalists but an abundance of reporters. Journalists have some background in the subject, either through experience or education, and are known for intense research and taking great care in the presentation of their discoveries, while reporters merely parrot what other people say without giving background, history or context. His experiences coupled with his strong education will make him a preferred choice for issues covering cultural geography, military issues, war, government and to some extent international affairs to my mind. He has seen and lived through things most people will never know and could never imagine. Those experiences should not be put aside when he seeks the truth as he researches a topic or relates the details of a story. It is, in fact, those experiences that demand that he take on such topics.
Posted by Robb Yancey on Thu 13 Aug 2009 at 01:37 PM
Joining this conversation at a late date, I debate whether to add to the volume. Perhaps the subject is exhausted. I know I am, after consuming the entirety of comment above. As a veteran of both military and newsroom service, though, and there are far too few of us – I’d appreciate being able to offer these thoughts:
In general, understanding one’s beat is a good thing. The general assignment myth (“I don’t know anything about this, so I can be completely objective”) is both simple and wrong. Viewers, listeners and readers are not best served when inexperienced reporters interpret issues sometimes involving life and death. It has often struck me that an assignment manager who would never send to the ball park a reporter who didn’t understand the basic rules of sport will comfortably assure senior editors that learning on the job is acceptable in combat.
Having a military-experienced reporter in the newsroom provides understandings useful to better accomplishing an oversight role. (In a similar vein, military veterans serving in Congress are less likely to rubber stamp specious defense spending programs, for fear of being labeled someone “who didn’t serve and doesn’t care about people in uniform.”)
Cold objectivity is not a humanly achievable – or arguably, even desirable – reporting standard. Fairness is. It is eminently attainable, when newsgathering and editing are overseen by experienced editors, and the standard to which all of us in journalism should hold ourselves.
It is not reasonable, I believe, to suggest that honorable military service in and of itself precludes the ability to report fairly. Editors must be sensitive to the ways in which any reporter’s experience might inappropriately color reporting – be it because of religious belief, lifestyle or commercial affiliation. (Does “Dr. Bob" the medical reporter, for instance, have business dealings with a particular hospital group or pharmaceutical interest?) Military service background is just another such consideration.
Diversity in a newsroom is a good thing. An ideal news production setting will include individuals of various races, ethnicities and sexual identities, but also – and as importantly – socio-economic backgrounds, religions and life experiences. In a nation at war since 2001, it would seem military service would be among those life experiences. One, I believe, particularly in time of war, creating a net benefit to potential reporting in most any newsroom.
Finally, I would suggest that the cultural misunderstandings described by Matt’s experience are part of a larger, worrying civil-military relations gap in the U. S. As “internal mercenaries” (i.e., members of a small, professional military caste) fight the nation’s wars – in place of large conscripted armies of decades past – fewer American’s know them. Service member deaths, when they occur, impact fewer in the nation. War is what the rest of us “pay them to take care of for us.” Service members, cloistered in communities of their own, develop feelings of moral superiority – perceive themselves as aspiring to a higher moral calling. It is a worrying formula. Part of the solution to problems potentially resulting from such schism is reporting, informed by experience, done in newsrooms where one or some have served in uniform.
Posted by Chas Henry on Wed 19 Aug 2009 at 03:01 PM