Liz Cox Barrett: Paul McLeary, my colleague, recently wrote the following upon his return from Iraq, where he went in January to report on how the press is doing its job there: “Among reporters who have been in and out of Iraq since the beginning of the war, there seems to be a kind of consensus that the summer of 2003 and, to a much lesser extent, part of 2004, was a kind of golden period for reporting … But those days are long gone, and all that’s left are a group of hardened, somewhat frustrated reporters, angry at their inability to move around; a group, it must be said, that is becoming increasingly isolated as the once-formidable media presence in Baghdad slowly clears out.”
You freelanced in Iraq in 2003 and 2004. Did you experience your time there as a “golden period for reporting” — or do you regard it that way now, with hindsight? Would you go back to Iraq now to report, knowing how constrained you would be? Would you go back as a freelancer (given what you wrote in the current issue of the American Prospect — that “ Baghdad on a budget brings only trouble, as the majority of Western reporters kidnapped or killed in Iraq have been freelance…”)
Christina Asquith: “Golden period” is definitely how I would describe reporting in Iraq in 2003 and early 2004. We could drive ourselves without security anywhere in the country, and most everyone was eager to talk with journalists. Also, because the Iraqi ministries were in nascent stages of rebuilding, most senior ministry officials didn’t even have secretaries yet, so there was no one to tell us to make an appointment or brush us off— we had great access. The situation changed after the first U.S. invasion of Falluja in April 2004. After that, Iraqis began to say: “I thought you were here to liberate us, and now you are invading us?” There was always some anti-Americanism, but it really grew after Falluja. Throughout the summer and fall of 2004, we saw increasing terrorism attacks, kidnappings and beheadings. But anti-Americanism was not the biggest problem for journalists, as most Iraqis understand the objective role of the journalist. The trouble was the creation of a black market for hostages. Terrorist groups began offering money to any Iraqi who could nab a Western hostages, so that created a financial incentive for even your former friends— your Iraqi driver, your hotel cleaning staff, anyone— to kidnap you and turn you over to the terrorist group. By the end of 2004, journalists were getting information that insurgents had lists of who was staying inside the hotel, and that they were waiting outside to kidnap us. At the same time, Iraqis grew scared of being seen with Westerners, for fear that an insurgent would accuse them of “collaborating with the enemy.” I would show up at a school, and the teachers would beg me to please leave. So, I felt as though my presence was putting my Iraqi sources in real danger— shortly after that, I left Iraq for good.
LCB: What are your thoughts on the evergreen criticism that reporters in Iraq focus on the tragic, the violent — the “bad news” — to the detriment of the more mundane “good news” stories about rebuilding and such?
CA: The journalists in Iraq have always done a tremendous job of covering the story; including the good and bad news. I think the fact that both sides of the debate criticize journalists equally means that we’re probably striking a good balance.
LCB: What news outlet/s or reporter/s are, to your mind, still managing to do great work in Iraq today in spite of all the challenges? Who do you read, follow, admire over there?