[Air-l] So Much For Embedding

[Randolph Kluver (Assoc Prof)]

I disagree with much of what Maximilian Forte says, based on my
observations of the embedded journalists both within BBC and CNN, as
well as the print journalists.  To my thinking, the embedded journalists
haven't been much help to the US at all, as they have only highlighted
delays and difficulties that wouldn't signal much concern if they
weren't there.  When a reporter comes under fire, he/she says "the
strategy is falling apart! We're gonna die!"   Two telling examples, the
Sunday afternoon (Singapore time) skirmish in Umm Qasr, which was
portrayed on both networks as a major battle, along the lines of battle
of the bulge.  The nature of this coverage prompted the Iraqi
information minister, who just a couple of hours earlier had said that
all the footage from Umm Qasr was actually shot in Kuwait, as the
coalition forces "weren't even in Iraq," to go on air to prove how
effectively Iraq was repelling the troops, who were, in fact, in Iraq
after all, and were getting a drubbing.  The response of Iraqi TV
illustrates, I think, that the embedded reporters are not really helping
the US forces much.

A second example is the initial helicopter attacks in Medina, in which
reporters as much as said that the hand guns fired at helicopters would
prevent any effective air attack. Probes are a normal part of military
strategy, and thus heavy resistance in one place is just more data, not
to be confused with a true threat.  Certainly the military units
involved paid attention to these, but only as part of a much larger
battle field.  The following briefing by Tommy Franks was interesting,
in that it showed that what military analysts and strategies took as a
normal occurrence, the journalists interpreted ominously.

One final issue is the Jerusalem Post embedded reporter, Caroline Glick,
who "broke" the story on the supposed chemical factory.  Clearly, the
pentagon said that news was "premature," as if it turned out to not
manufacture weapons, the credibility of the US would suffer.  It seems
at this point that it is an arms cache, not a chemical plant.  This
illustrates my point, though, that the embedded reporters, although they
are under orders to not reveal certain kinds of information, are
something of a liability to the US forces.

I guess I am curious as to how the military would be able to embed
journalists among the Iraqi civilians, since there seems to be a desire
to do that. Remember, there are at least as many "independent" or
"unilateral" journalists in Iraq as there are embedded.  In fact, It
seems that there are probably more independent journalists in Iraq,
since as Forte has noted, out of 500 or so embedded journalists, a
number of them are bored to tears, watching missiles fly out of
warships, or sitting at  military bases.  I would be curious to know how
many embedded jorunalists are actually in forward combat units.  At
least two, but most likely four, have already lost their lives, so the
message coming from the Pentagon is just as likely a friendly warning as
it is a threat.

Thus, the embedded journalists are more likely to undermine popular
support for the battle, than to serve as cheerleaders, precisely because
they have, in Forte's words, "very little in the way of critical
analysis or concrete information".  In fact, now that every columnist in
every newspaper, including Maureen Dowd, is giving war advice, it seems
much more accurate to say that the embedded reporters are not much help
to the military and/or political strategies fo the administration.  I
would not argue that the program is to be suspended, as I think it is a
valuable way of getting at least some perspective on the war.  Tommy
Franks says he is a "fan" of the embedded reporters, but my sense is
that he likes them primarily because they serve primarily to present the
"view from the field," and thus are a check against false allegations.
If this post is too "off topic" for this listserve, perhaps Dr. Forte
could email me his responses privately.  

A. Randolph Kluver
School of Communication and Information
Nanyang Technological University
31 Nanyang Link
Singapore, 637718
(65) 6790-5770
Fax (65) 6792-4329