Iraq Coverage: Politics Primary, War Secondary

The American Journalism Review discusses “Whatever Happened to Iraq?” in news coverage. Much ground is covered. But, no where in this lengthy examination is there discussion that the “surge” has worked, militarily and consequently increasingly politically, and that most of the Democrat talking points are no longer valid. No where is there a discussion of how this decline in bad news or disputed views has led to less interest by the media.

The statistics of declining coverage:

During the first 10 weeks of 2007, Iraq accounted for 23 percent of the newshole fornetwork TV news. In 2008, it plummeted to 3 percent during that period. On cable networks it fell from 24 percent to 1 percent, according to a study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism. …

A daily tracking of 65 newspapers by the Associated Press confirms a dip in page-one play throughout the country. In September 2007, the AP found 457 Iraq-related stories (154 by the AP) on front pages, many related to a progress report delivered to Congress by Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq. Over the succeeding months, that number fell to as low as 49. A spike in March 2008 was largely due to a rash of stories keyed to the conflict's fifth anniversary, according to AP Senior Managing Editor Mike Silverman.

The reasoning by those in media:

Why the dramatic drop-off? Gatekeepers offer a variety of reasons, from the enormous danger for journalists on the ground in Iraq (see "Obstructed View," April/May 2007) to plunging newsroom budgets and shrinking news space. Competing megastories on the home front like the presidential primaries and the sagging economy figure into the equation. So does the exorbitant cost of keeping correspondents in Baghdad.

But, another element is also emphasized, that US political debate has dropped off:

Mark Jurkowitz, associate director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, points to May 24, 2007, as a major turning point in the coverage of U.S. policy toward Iraq. That's the day Congress voted to continue to fund the war without troop withdrawal timetables, giving the White House a major victory in a clash with the Democratic leadership over who would control the purse strings and thus the future of the war. Democrats felt they had a mandate from Americans to bring the troops home. President Bush stuck to a hard line and came out the victor. "The political fight was over," Jurkowitz says. "Iraq no longer was a hot story. The media began looking elsewhere."

The only reason the media may find renewed interest will be if the 2008 election debate reignites their interest:

"When we get in the general election mode, Iraq will be a big issue. The candidates will set the agenda for the discussion and the media will pick it up. This could reinvigorate the debate," Jurkowitz says. "The war will be back in the headlines."

The issues of interest the AJR article raises are about uses of Iraqi oil revenues or asserted impacts on the US economy. Again, no where in the AJR article is there concern for the geostrategic outcomes.

The AJR affirms that the media’s focus is upon political exploitation of war weariness, with a decided domestic political outcome in mind, rather than reporting the news or the global and security prices to pay if we fail to see through our commitment.