Remember when, before the presidential election, every night on the evening news the reporter used to follow the casualty figures from Iraq with something like;
"and that's the 149th soldier to be killed in Iraq SINCE PRESIDENT BUSH DECLARED AN END TO MAJOR COMBAT".
Whatever happened to that?
Why don't I hear them say that anymore? It's not any less true now than it was then. So what was behind it?
I believe it's was because when they were saying it, they were hoping to influence people's vote for president. Since it is too late for that now, there is no need to say it anymore.
It still appears that the casualties are reported with some degree of senasationalism.
Take today's news for example.
By combining the number killed in a helicopter crash in western Iraq with the number killed in ambushes in eastern Iraq, the news vultures are able to say;
"the single deadliest day for U.S. forces since the war in Iraq began nearly two years ago, defense officials said".(that from the Washington Post)
While I'm at it, I'll add a comment about "time", the way news people use it.
I think it's amusing to hear a news person say something like; "that is the largest increase in unemployment figures in nearly two DECADES!"
Now I know they hope to make two decades sound like it's a hundred years. Maybe it would sound even longer if they said "almost a thousand weeks" next time.
1 comment:
You are spot on my man. The left is only interested in the Iraq body count when it serves their selfish motivations. I think you might enjoy my blog, Spinnada. It's a bit crusty like me but I don't like spin on either side of the political spectrum. Lately though it seems to eminate from the Liberal Left Media folks and the Demowhiners more so than from the crusty right. A drunk killer and several airheads just ganged up on Condi over some 'lies' she supposedly told. I checked it out and they were obviously spinning in the wind as usual.
Post a Comment