U.S. Progress in Iraq Receives Scant Coverage in NY Times, Wash Post in November

[Revmitchell]

While U.S. combat casualties in Iraq were at an all-time low in November 2008 – five reported combat deaths -- coverage of the war was sparse in The New York Times and The Washington Post compared with previous election cycles, an analysis of the Nexis news database shows.

In The New York Times, four front-page stories mentioned Iraq in the headline in November 2008 compared with 13 in November 2006, the last time a national election was held -- a drop of 70 percent. Most of those front-page stories in The New York Times concerned a security pact between U.S. and Iraqi officials.


More Here

 

[LeBuick]

I think it's normal for the media to report the bad in war and not the good. That's what sells.

The likewise don't report the thousands of good bank transactions, but let the bank get robbed and it makes the news. Let someone die in the robbery and it makes front page.

 

[Jim1999]

Don't feel isolated. We get the same coverage in Canadian press regarding our progress in Afghanistan. All the casualties see print and even huge funerals at home. But, when the Afghan people praise Canadian troops for their humanitarianism,,forget it,,we have to dig for that news.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[carpro]

Liberals and their newspaper, the New York slimes, are allergic to victory in Iraq.

 

[LeBuick]

Liberals and their newspaper, the New York slimes, are allergic to victory in Iraq.

Republican's have more of the big bucks, why don't they own more media outlets? This way they can stop blaming the liberal media and have their own sources to spread information they want spread as news.

Oh, that's right, they can't play the victim card if they have their own media. :BangHead: