NBC Nightly News Spikes News About Fewest Troop Deaths of War

Photo of Brent Baker.

As lead-ins to short reports on the posthumous presentation of a Medal of Honor, ABC and CBS on Monday night managed to squeeze in -- more than 20 minutes into their evening newscasts -- brief mentions of how in May the fewest number U.S. servicemen were killed in Iraq in any month since the war began five years ago. But not NBC Nightly News. (And Sunday's Today and Nightly News, as well as Monday's Today, also skipped the good news.) NBC anchor Brian Williams on Monday led with worries that “because it's been underfunded for decades, mass transit may not be ready for all the Americans leaving their cars behind,” and ran his short update, on the Medal of Honor going to Army Private First Class Ross McGinnis, without anything about the decline in troops killed.

Fill-in ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos set up his report on the White House ceremony presenting the honor to the parents of McGinnis by dampening the positive news with the total death number:

The Pentagon reported 19 American troops were killed in May. That's the lowest monthly toll since the war began. The total number of Americans killed in the war is now approaching 4,100.

On the CBS Evening News, anchor Katie Couric also noted the total, but CBS didn't display it on screen, as she painted the fewest killed as “perhaps” a sign violence is going down:

In Iraq, a sign perhaps that violence is decreasing. In the lowest monthly death U.S. toll since the war began, 19 Americans were killed in May. The total U.S. toll for the war is now 4,086.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Yes, she said “monthly death U.S. toll.”

Unlike Couric, Stephanopoulos also pointed out the much-lower civilian death level: “Just over 500 Iraqi civilians were killed in war-related violence last month. That's half the number from the month before.”

ABC, but not CBS or NBC, aired a clip of President Bush praising McGinnis:

In an instant the grenade dropped through the gunner's hatch. He dropped inside, put himself against the grenade and absorbed the blast with his own body. With that split-second decision, Private McGinnis lost his own life and he saved his comrades.

(The lowest-ever U.S. troop death level in May earned a little broadcast network attention on Sunday with a brief mention in an introduction to a story on ABC's Good Morning America and during the news summary on CBS's Sunday Morning, but zilch on NBC's Today or Nightly News. Also nothing on Sunday's CBS Evening News or ABC's World News, nor on Today, GMA or The Early Show on Monday.)

NBC's lack of interest in highlighting the good news echoes the findings of a February 28 Media Reality Check by the MRC's Rich Noyes, “Fewer U.S. Dead = Less TV Coverage of Iraq: Networks Minimize Good News From Iraq, Don't Press Democrats on 'Wrong-Headed' Predictions.”

Some examples of how NBC Nightly News has emphasized the negative or avoided good news from Iraq:

An April 8 NewsBusters item, “NBC Stacks Deck Against Petraeus, and Takes a Shot at McCain Too,” recounted:

NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams led Tuesday's newscast by listing the burden of the Iraq war in years, troops, deaths and cost before Jim Miklaszewski, unlike reporters on ABC and CBS, found it newsworthy to show a man, in the Senate hearing for General David Petraeus, shouting "bring them home!" In the next story, Andrea Mitchell decided to highlight, again unlike ABC or CBS, how John McCain "stumbled...by again describing al Qaeda as Shiite" and Williams turned to Richard Engel, NBC's Iraq reporter, who described Petraeus' decision to end troop withdrawals in July as "frustrating and disheartening in that the rules of the game have changed." Williams opened: "The war's now five years old. That's longer than U.S. involvement in World War II. There are currently 162,000 U.S. troops serving in Iraq. Death toll is now over 4,000. And the price tag of this war for military operations alone: nearly half a trillion dollars so far."

Before and after audio of a man yelling "bring them home!", Miklaszewski helpfully suggested: "A protestor voiced what some Americans are demanding for U.S. troops." In a piece by Mitchell on how the three presidential candidates approached Petraeus, she pointed how that "the Republican Senator also stumbled, briefly, by again describing al Qaeda as Shiite." She countered: "Al Qaeda is Sunni, not Shiite. McCain immediately corrected himself." So, if he immediately corrected himself, why highlight it?

My November 2 NewsBusters post, “Only ABC Reports Military's Stats on Violence Plunging in Iraq,” reported:

Lt. General Raymond Ordierno on Thursday reported significant progress in reduced violence in Iraq, but of the broadcast network evening newscasts only ABC's World News bothered to cover the positive trend as anchor Charles Gibson introduced a full story on how "military officials gave one of the most upbeat assessments of the security situation in Iraq that we have heard since the opening months of the war." The CBS Evening News and NBC Nightly skipped the positive trend, but CBS had time for a story on the investigation of the September shooting of civilians by Blackwater and NBC aired a piece on Hillary Clinton "playing the gender card." The Washington Post and New York Times on Friday also made very different news judgments on the importance of the positive direction as the Post put the news on its front page while the Times hid it in a story, on an inside page, about Iran's role in Iraq.

The July 30, 2007 NewsBusters item, “NBC Skips More Upbeat Iraq Judgment ABC and CBS Find Newsworthy,” revealed:

NBC Nightly News on Monday ignored a development both ABC and CBS found newsworthy, that after eight days in Iraq, two Brookings Institution scholars who describe themselves as "harshly" critical of Bush's Iraq policy, determined the situation in Iraq is better than they assumed and so the "surge" should continue into next year. Instead of reporting the fresh assessment from Michael O'Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack, NBC anchor Brian Williams, citing "a draft U.S. report," aired a full story on how "there are disturbing new details about corruption at the very top of the Iraqi government." But the NBC Nightly News has hardly been reticent before about running soundbites from O'Hanlon with dire warnings about Iraq.

ABC anchor Charles Gibson declared "the column was the talk of Washington today." From Iraq, Terry McCarthy related that "the report tracks fairly closely with what we're seeing both in our visits to U.S. bases in and around Baghdad involved with the surge, and also our trips out to Baghdad neighborhoods talking to Iraqi population. Clearly, security is improving as the U.S. military footprint expands so the violence goes down, the sectarian killings go down." Indeed, on CBS, David Martin noted how "with one day left in the month, American casualties in July are the lowest since the troop surge began in February. And civilian casualties are down a third." Martin aired soundbites from Pollack and O'Hanlon as he described "just enough progress so that a critic like Michael O'Hanlon, who used to think the surge was too little too late, now believes it should be continued."...

As noted above, the NBC Nightly News hasn't hesitated to feature O'Hanlon's previous dire forecasts. On April 28, the newscast featured O'Hanlon's warning: "We're going to have to see some pretty striking results from the surge pretty soon to continue to justify the strain and the sacrifice it's exacting on our forces." A week earlier, on April 20, O'Hanlon predicted: "If al-Sadr's people really fight us hard, we are in very bad trouble. If the car bombings continue like they did on Wednesday, we are not going to prevail." And back on February 3, NBC brought O'Hanlon on to comment on a government report about the situation in Iraq: "This report definitely leaves open the distinct possibility of utter chaos, outright civil war and complete mission failure. There is no doubt that Iraq could simply collapse."...

Transcripts of the Iraq coverage on the Monday, June 2 broadcast network evening newscasts:

ABC's World News:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Now to Iraq, where we learned today that just over 500 Iraqi civilians were killed in war-related violence last month. That's half the number from the month before. Also the Pentagon reported 19 American troops were killed in May. That's the lowest monthly toll since the war began. The total number of Americans killed in the war is now approaching 4,100.

One of those fallen service members received America's highest military honor today. At an emotional White House ceremony, President Bush awarded the Medal of Honor to a 19-year-old Army Private First Class. In 2006, he sacrificed his life to save his comrades as they patrolled Baghdad in a Humvee. The family of Ross McGinnis was there today and so were the four men he saved.

PRESIDENT BUSH: In an instant the grenade dropped through the gunner's hatch. He dropped inside, put himself against the grenade and absorbed the blast with his own body. With that split-second decision, Private McGinnis lost his own life and he saved his comrades.

STAFF SERGEANT IAN NEWLAND: He wanted to ensure that we made it out of it. Actually we train for the opposite. We train to get away from the grenade. He lived to fight another day and that's not the decision he made. Why didn't it go differently, why did he do that? Why did my soldier die in my arms instead of me?

THOMAS McGINNIS, FATHER OF PFC ROSS McGINNIS: I guess the only thing you're going to remember about my son is that he did the right thing at the right time.

STEPHANOPOULOS: A teenage soldier's sacrifice and a country's enduring gratitude.

CBS Evening News:

KATIE COURIC: In Iraq, a sign perhaps that violence is decreasing. In the lowest monthly death U.S. toll since the war began, 19 Americans were killed in May. The total U.S. toll for the war is now 4,086.

That number, by the way, includes a soldier who today was awarded the nation's highest military honor for sacrificing his own life to save his comrades. From the time he was in kindergarten, Ross McGinnis wanted to be an Army man. And in December, 2006, the 19-year-old Pennsylvania native was in the gunner's hatch of a Humvee patrolling Baghdad when a grenade was thrown into the vehicle. Private McGinnis could have jumped out and saved himself, but instead he jumped on top of the grenade and saved his four comrades who couldn't get out.

SERGEANT LYLE BUEHLER: I still ponder everyday how you can make a decision that quick.

TOM McGINNIS, FATHER: He did the right thing at the right time.

COURIC: Today, President Bush presented the Medal of Honor to Private Ross McGinnis' parents.

ROMAYNE McGINNIS, MOTHER: Ross did what he did for his buddies.

SPECIALIST SEAN LAWSON: If it wasn't for him, I would be dead. I wouldn't be married right now. I wouldn't have a life of my own.

NBC Nightly News:

BRIAN WILLIAMS: For the fourth time since the start of the war in Iraq President Bush today awarded the Medal of Honor, this nation's highest military decoration, but for the fourth time the recipient is not alive to accept it. Specialist Ross McGinnis, then a private, was killed in the line of duty back in 2006. He was on patrol when a grenade landed in his Humvee. He threw his body over it and saved the lives of four men. All four men were on hand at the White House today for the ceremony. Friends say they remember McGinnis drawing pictures of soldiers in kindergarten. He wanted to be one. Ross McGinnis, recipient of the Medal of Honor, was 19.

—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

God forbid.....

they show a positive take on Iraq.  God how I hate the MSM, and their biased BS. 

"If a man does his best, what else is there"?

General George S. Patton Jr.

What !? No mention of Keith

What !? No mention of Keith Olbermans 4 tax warrants in lieu of 150 k, I thought for sure they would run that.

 "You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

                   - Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

                               " The Cake is a lie."   

Or...................

 Al "I'm so far left I'm ready to fall off the planet" Franken.  True sign of the apocalypse is the election of Obamanation, and Al "I have no clue" Franken.  Time to dig shelters if that happens!

"If a man does his best, what else is there"?

General George S. Patton Jr.

“a sign perhaps that violence is decreasing”

On the CBS Evening News, anchor Katie Couric … painted the fewest [s/b US soldiers] killed as “perhaps” a sign violence is going down:

In Iraq, a sign perhaps that violence is decreasing. In the lowest monthly death U.S. toll since the war began, 19 Americans were killed in May. The total U.S. toll for the war is now 4,086.

Yes, she said “monthly death U.S. toll.”

…And BDS Liberals rant about how stupid Bush is?!?

Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.

NBC. ugh

If "My Name is Earl" ever moves to another network, there will be no need to ever watch NBC again in my household. 

The Coward, Brian Williams

I would like to see everyone who will, e-mail nbc and tell them what a coward and a chicken-$hit brian williams is, Here is an e-mail address,nightly@nbc.com
E-mail Address(es):
  nightly@nbc.com

 supposedly at this address they want to know what you think.

(GRINS)

kilrod

Brian Williams is a scum-sucking bottom-feeder.

Not to mention an enemy propagandist.

Think of him as the Tokyo Rose of WW IV.

There is no England anymore.

Any news org that reports

Any news org that reports 50% of the news can only be 50% credible.

Lame Stream Media

The Lame Stream Media must live up to their name at all cost. So far the cost is the NYSlimes and several broadcast outlets on the verge of never being seen again. Down the old 'we're broke' hole they go still spouting anti-american propaganda. NBC is the only Lame Stream Media outlet ever on in my home and that's for the 6 and 11 PM local news. Man's got to know how many democrats died of drug overdose in the neighborhood and they never fail to please. I know they're democrats because it goes from welfare to drugs to dead.

 

Old, Retired and glad of it.

"Only 19"

Only nineteen American sworn troops killed?

"Only?"

Well, hell then, lets fucking celebrate! "Only nineteen dedicated Americans were killed!

What a triumph!

What sick and twisted situational ethics think that "only nineteen" Americans were killed?

Nineteen would've wiped out my squad in Nam + a few.

Fuck them and anyone else that thinks that "only nineteen" Americans died last month is a "good thing."

Very much.

 

Emotionally I agree with

Emotionally I agree with you with the exception of the profanity.  We all mourn losses, particularly for our comrades which I have losta couple during this war.

Analytically I disagree with you when I analyze the situation and realize  a.)  The situation is rapidly improving.  b.) The cost paid is minimal in comparison to history.  c.)  The goals are slowly and surely being met.

Being responsible means we must react analytically, not emotionally if we intend to win any war.

.

.

First, watch your mouth,

First, watch your mouth, that language is not acceptable here.

2nd, your sense of proportion is way off over the 19 soldiers dying in Iraq.  We lost 58,000+ soldiers from 1964 to 1973 (9 years) in the Vietnam War as compared to 4085 from 2003 to 2008 (5 years) so as far as the small rate of our people dying you should be grateful.  http://www.taphilo.com/history/war-deaths.shtml  I don't hear you screaming bloody murder over the 40,000+ people who die on our highways every year, so your criticism is just specious. 

3rd, While we are not happy any soldier dies in service to his/her country, death is fact of life in the military and they knew full well when signing on as a VOLUNTEER that the possibility of dying was very real.  Remember, in Vietnam most were drafted, you had no choices.  So drawing any negative conclusion on your part is primarily a political one, not one based on reality.  Our soldiers are not helpless victims of the Establishment.  And don't you dare attempt to denigrate our soldiers by claiming they were too stupid like that waste of space Kerry or make the specious claim they had few choices and needed a job.

4th, Your attitude is based on the context of prior wars like the Vietnam War where military officers did not have the same sense of protecting their soldiers as assets and instead viewed them as expendable.  That sea change in attitude probably was the most instrumental in reducing mortality rates even with introduction of bullet proof vests.

 Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.  

For the profane Harry

Why, harry?  Could it be that this country isn't as whiny and pathetic enough for you?

Iraq isn't a bowl of cherries but nor is it a lost cause as you so desperately want to believe.  And judging by the tone of your post, there isn't ANYTHING in this country you see worth defending.  Fortunately for the nation, not many share your sentiments.   

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

For the unprofane Unsane..

For the unprofane Unsane...you might want to check out some of profane Harry's other posts.  He seems to be farther to the right than even you claim to be. :-)

Jer

Not a stretch

For those who habitually read my posts, that really isn't a stretch.  I am not as far to the Right as you think.  Not too many Rightists think too highly of Ayn Rand... 

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

Unsane...

That comment was at least partly tongue-in-cheek, Unsane.  I do habitually read and am informed by your posts.  I'm not quite sure where to place you ideologically--and really don't worry about it anyway.  But having put me well out on the Left, I'm not sure you give it much thought either. :-)  I believe Rand was once held in considerably more esteem by the Right than she has been in recent years.

Jer

Rand

Ayn Rand would be a conservative heroine in this country if it weren't for the fact that her philosophy is rooted in uncompromising atheism.   

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

Rand panned

I think you are one hundred per cent correct.

Jer

They also never report how

They also never report how many terrorists are dead.

20,000 frags, 4,000 deaths. I see a difference.

Indeed. This is probably the most underreported statistic throughout the entire war. Of course, if the media published it, the approval rating for the President would skyrocket, so the statistic would be counter-intuitive!

The 20,000 terrorists deaths are only from 2006 - to present

I'm sure there were many more during the initial Afghanistan invasion.

2002-2005 probably had a higher total if anything. I remember back then that the military didn't want to release the death totals for some reason. I think they didn't want to be morbidly glee about killing people or something. I don't really understand it.

I never saw these numbers from 2006-to present before and it's nice that this guy is keeping track with the press releases. Seeing these numbers, I wouldn't be surprised if the 2002-present total exceeded 50,000. Does anyone know the number that have been detained?

It's unbelievable that the media loves to report U.S. casualties and "Civilian" deaths that are made up, but they won't report these.

They aren't going to report

They aren't going to report this Dee it doesn't fit their leftist agenda...

mattm....great chart...thanks.

"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill

BT - I was hoping someone like BD would know the total number

of terrorists detained. I'm curious what that number is also.

Sorry Dee, I have no

Sorry Dee, I have no idea. 

 

Maybe what we need included

Maybe what we need included in every report is monthy and to-date numbers of soldiers, terrorists and civilians killed?

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

Yeah whichwing but fat chance we'll ever get it

We should also have totals of Civilians killed in America each month for comparison.

They are not interested in giving us a balanced picture at all. The are only interested in making things in Iraq look as bad as possible.

This isn't bias, it is

This isn't bias, it is truth. You are asking for bias. Most of you seem to think they should report the number for May and not mention the total. That would be biased wouldn't it? You want them to give you the good news and keep the bad news to themselves. You take the good with the bad.

And remember this: a reduction in violence is not an end to the violence, which would be a much better goal to strive for.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

 

WW,


And remember this: a reduction in violence is not an end to the violence, which would be a much better goal to strive for.

Yeah, all we have to do is surrender and leave, then the violence would end, right?

Yeah, just like it ended after we quit Vietnam.

Only problem was, the violence didn't end, as several million people were slaughtered after we left.

But hey, at least our conscience was clear, right? After all, that is really all that matters to you surrender monkeys, isn't it?

Who cares about the innocents who will be slaughtered in droves if we leave Iraq? Right?

After all, it's peace at any price, no matter what. Right?

Look at 'Mr. Jump To

Look at 'Mr. Jump To Conclusions' here. Why didn't you jump to the conclusion that I meant total victory, surrender by the enemy, or something along those lines? Maybe you were just looking for a chance to say "surrender monkey."

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

 

WW, either you support total victory...

...and I mean until the last one of 'em is dead, or at least incapacitated to the point of impotence, or you do not.

There is no middle ground here.

Compromise = surrender.

Period.

You are fighting an

You are fighting an ideology, dont' you see how that is an impossible cause?

Your inability to compromise would keep as at war with one group of people or another until our nation collapsed onto itself. I hope that isn't your aim.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

 

Get real

Your inability to compromise

 

What, why is it we should compramise? When have they ever comprimised, they have broken every agreement ever made with them. Like I said, Hopeless

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

WW, If you knew anything at all about the history of Islam...

...you would not have posted that comment.

There is no such thing as "compromise" with the barbarians. They see any attempt to do so as weakness on the part of their enemy (that being any infidel alive and breathing on this planet.)

Islam has been at war with the civilized world for over fourteen centuries. During that time, countless nations have arisen, only to disapear shortly thereafter.

The average life-span for truly free nations has historically been only 200 years. This country is now in its 238th year of existence.

We are living on borrowed time.

Just sixty years ago, had an attack such as we suffered on 9/11 taken place, Harry S. Truman would have responded with everything we had, including nukes, most likely. He would have literally put the fear of Allah into the minds of the camel-riders, to the point that they would probably have left us alone for at least a half-century or so.

By 9/11 2001, the cancer that is liberalism had so weakened the resolve of this nation that our response was, quitre frankly, rather impotent.

Once again, we have shown weakness to an enemy that knows how to exploit said weakness to the fullest. They have been doing it for 1400 years.

At least GWB knows something about Islam that most people (apparently including you) do not, and that is, in the event of a Jihad, all Muslims are commanded to go to wherever the conflict is, and fight.

Perhaps you woud rather have them come here?

The Islamic supremecists are currently winning the GWOT. Unless what remains of Western civilization pulls its head out if its rear-end and does something decisive, Islam is going to ultimately prevail.

Waiting until after the Islamo-fascists have destroyed a U.S. City will be too late.

 

For the weak, whiny WhichWhine

 You are fighting an ideology, dont' you see how that is an impossible cause?   Explain the Cold War, and the events of 9 November 1989 then.

Your inability to compromise would keep as at war with one group of people or another until our nation collapsed onto itself. I hope that isn't your aim.   I know you LOVE and LIVE FOR the idea of living on your knees in servitude to others, but bear with me here.

How do you compromise with those who want us either dead or converted to Islam? 

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

Violence. It's what brings peace.

And remember this: a reduction in violence is not an end to the violence, which would be a much better goal to strive for.  So therefore you advocate MORE violence?

You see, we can bring the whole thing to a halt.  But what I have in mind will make you extremely squeamish (as the whole thought of protecting and defending the United States makes you sqeamish) and break out into uncontrollable vomiting.  However, it WILL work.  Violence ALWAYS works, after all.   

Finally, as one who has completed my time in the desert recently, the problem is that the media want to do the complete opposite: report ONLY items which feed their penchant for defeatism.  From what I saw, Iraq is NOT a bowl of cherries, but neither is it an irredeemable hellhole the media desperately wants you to believe it to be.

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

"Finally, as one who has

"Finally, as one who has completed my time in the desert recently, the problem is that the media want to do the complete opposite: report ONLY items which feed their penchant for defeatism"

Unsane, don't you realize that as a military member that you don't matter?  How dare you suggest that the MSM's view and their egos don't trump the views of soldiers putting their asses on the line.  Don't you know that the MSM and their ego were correct in the reporting on the Tet Offensive?  Who cares if the VC were virtually destroyed, and that S. Vietnam could possibly be like S. Korea?  No, all that matters Unsane is the MSM and their egos.  Your attempts at getting out the truth are futile, because left wing college professors say that Vets don't matter, and only they, the MSM and all of their egos matter.

Carl!!!

Carl, that's what I like about you.  BEFORE I get carried away with thinking that I learned something useful from my experiences, you step in to bring me down to earth and show me the errors of my ways.  I need to defer my critical thinking and my experiences to those who know best, the MSM.  I won't allow myself to get so carried away again.

Hey, from what I understand, according to the MSM, Robert Mugabe was unfairly maligned and he, in fact, won the election in Zimbabwe with an overwhelming majority.  Shame on the MDC from trying to swipe the election from him. 

:-)

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

So we all agree?

We all agree that it was not "liberal bias" to report the total number of deaths along with the May numbers?

(Good to hear from you again Unsane, glad your home.)

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

 

No, we all agree the story

No, we all agree the story has a negative spin USING the total number of deaths along the with the May numbers to MINIMIZE the progress in Iraq.  The story carries the unspoken agenda of opposition to the GWOT, a JOURNALIST is supposed to report the facts not imply or insert their opinions and agenda.  Since this story carries with it the implied agenda of opposition to the GWOT in Iraq, it is a PROPAGANDA piece, not journalism.  We know the difference between journalism and propaganda, do you?

 Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.  

They did report FACTS. You

They did report FACTS. You don't like that they included more than one fact and have decided to call that "liberal bias." Saying "X number died this month, bringing the total to Y" is not propaganda. When they pulled another body from the WTC and then told you the running total did you cry bias? I bet you didn't. In both cases they were reporting the facts, how are they different?

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

 

Apparently, you didn't read

Apparently, you didn't read what I said and substituted what you wanted me to say.  The facts are fine, context is fine but spin is not fine.  The article was spun, SPIN = PROPAGANDA. 

JOURNALISM = ALL THE FACTS WITHOUT OPINION OR AGENDA

I can't make it any clearer for you.

 Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.  

You don't need you to make

You don't need you to make it clearer for me, I see the story and I have apparently come to a different conclusion. I saw no spin, just the facts. If too many facts equal spin you should head over to Fox News for less facts and more opinion. (Your whole argument is based on them including one more fact than you wanted to hear, you don't even dispute the fact.)

Many stories have been spun, whether for the benefit of the right or the left, but this was not one of them.

P.S. This is the "propaganda" in question:

KATIE COURIC: In Iraq, a sign perhaps that violence is decreasing. In
the lowest monthly death U.S. toll since the war began, 19 Americans
were killed in May. The total U.S. toll for the war is now 4,086.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Now to Iraq, where we learned today that just
over 500 Iraqi civilians were killed in war-related violence last
month. That's half the number from the month before. Also the Pentagon
reported 19 American troops were killed in May. That's the lowest
monthly toll since the war began. The total number of Americans killed
in the war is now approaching 4,100.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

 

To claim no bias on this is absurd whichwing

Did you even read the article? He didn't claim that ABC or CBS didn't mention it, he said they were both at least 20 min into their broadcast before they did and then that mention was brief.

NBC was the one who failed to mention it at all.

All three showed way less attention to it than they did to the "bad news" like a soldier dying before he could receive his medal. An increase in deaths would be more prominent in their broadcasts and missing from none.

I disagree. Their mentions

I disagree. Their mentions of the monthly and year-to-date totals were indeed brief, but they were used more as a lead in for the story about the Medal of Honor than anything. And as you said, one network didn't report either total, just the story about the soldier.

Maybe we're beginning to look too hard for bias. Let's just take the good news of May being the lowest monthly total and stop trying to find something to bitch about.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

 

Yes you do agree WhichWing

You are saying to me right back what I said. You seem to be touting the soldier medal story as a positive and I'm saying it's a negative because they only focused on it due to the fact that he's dead. They have ignored many medal stories of live soldiers. I have no problems with them mentioning the heroics of brave soldiers who have died, but they should also mention the one's who are alive. They used this story ,to give a negative face and overshadow the improvements. Regardless, I still have no problems with them mentioning the brave soldier and his story, it's just how they did it that was tacky. They need to find much more time to mention the heroics of all of our soldiers.

The fact that one Network didn't mention it and the others two used it only after the lead in of the medal story with a focus being on the soldier not living to receive it is pretty pathetic and transparent. If the death total had increased, it would have been more prominent with no counterbalancing story about something positive.

"WE" are not doing anything. YOU don't see much problem with the media. "WE", as in others of us, do see bias. This is as clear a story of bias as any and if you can't see that, then you don't watch much news or are brainwashed by it.

You are the bias. You took

You are the bias. You took positive stories and complained about how they were delivered to you.

News provided:

*half as many civilians as last month were killed (good thing)

*a sign perhaps that violence is decreasing (good thing)

*the lowest monthly total, 19, since the war began (good thing)

*the total for the war, 4086 or 4100 (not such a good thing)

*a soldier was awarded the nation's highest military honor (good thing)

*sacrificed his own life to save his comrades (good, honorable thing)

Cry and cry that they give you no good news, and then cry that they don't make it sound good enough when they do.

And they didn't focus on the soldier being dead other than to tell you that he was recieving the Medal of Honor for giving his life to save another's. (Except for Brian Williams, his choice of words were less than ideal.)


"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

 

You are the one cry cry crying Wichwing

You are crying about this story that has complete validity and not complaining about tons and tons of bias in the reporting.

You didn't address how NBC news ignored the story completely or how all of the three networks have been pathetic in their coverage of medals given to live soldiers.

Of course they can't ignore completely (except NBC I guess) stories of decreases when they have been reporting the increases so vigilantly. The difference is in the tone an placement and what they use to offset it. This article is about the absence in NBC and the tone and placement of the other networks. You are cry cry crying that we don't have a right to complain about tone and placement.

You are blind if you can't see it. I don't think you want to see it. In either case, you have no write to cry cry cry about our complaints.

You win, negativity seems to

You win, negativity seems to be your strength and you should stick with what you know.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

 

Nice try Whichwing - you brought up crying

you're the negative one. I'm just playing your game. I know I won - because your points weren't valid.

  WW, nobody is

 

WW, nobody is suggesting that pointing out the deaths for the month and the total, or even the fallen solders medal is where the bias is. It is in the "tone" of the commentary, suggesting that  “perhaps” a sign violence is going down. When it is a trend and it is obviously going down, this is a snide comment to anyone with an even keel.
Also mentioning Iraqi citizen deaths, without putting them in context. Are these all deaths, including natural deaths, accidental deaths, killed by terrorist, or are they suggesting (as I personally think they are) are these "all" that our military has killed this month.

Not to mention nbc's silence on the subject, yet these guys will announce from the mountain top when it makes our country and our military look bad.

But if you do not want to see it, you wont. So I will not waste any more time explaining it to you.

 

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

We will have to agree to

We will have to agree to disagree. I still see 3 generally positive reports and a whole bunch of people complaining that the reports weren't delivered to their satisfaction. The general public (i.e. centrists) are going to come away from these reports thinking they have just been given good news about the direction of the war.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

 

No whichwing - you don't speak for the general public

you only speak for other left leaning people like yourself. It's obvious to anyone who pays attention that there is bias here and you still haven't addressed the points

1.) NBC ignored the News completely

2.) The other 2 networks only reported it after counterbalancing it with a very sad story of a heroic soldier who didn't live to get his medal

3.) The networks don't cover the majority of medal stories where the soldier is alive to receive them.

4.) News of increased deaths are not counterbalanced with stories of good things happening in Iraq and they are mentioned closer to the top of the broadcasts.

You even admitted that Williams was inappropriate in the way he conveyed the medal story, so with the three networks there are 2 degrees of bias. NBC was the worst, then CBS & ABC. Even the better ones still used the sad story to counterbalance and preceed it and waited 20 min or more into their broadcast to mention it.

A 'sad' story about a

A 'sad' story about a soldier being awarded the Medal of Honor?? Waiting too long to report the news you wanted to hear??? Get over it, they have delivered good news and you have decided to reject so that you continue to bitch about the 'liberal' media. It was GOOD NEWS!!!

And where in the world do you get the idea that I am 'left leaning'? Based on what? I'd be willing to bet that you are far more to the left than I am.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

 

Whichwing is leftwing because

only a left winger could think that their isn't a problem with the bias in the media.

I'm on the opposite side of everyone here on Immigration, but I don't get into arguments or complain about the coverage because I know that the media his highly bias to my side. They are even much more left than I am. They only portray the anti- illegal immigration stance as racist and never give a proper airing of their grievances. Just because I'm for a guest worker type solution doesn't mean I'm going to ride the MSM bandwagon of labeling everyone who disagrees as racist or backwards.

That's why I don't argue it much here. Everyone knows I'm not in agreement with most on it, but I'm not frustrated by my side not being heard on that issue. I am frustrated that like everything else, the media doesn't allow an intelligent debate on it.

Whichwing like any other liberal, doesn't see any problems with the media when they support his position that goes contrary to the normal Republican position. He buys into nefarious reasons for going to war and staying there and is okay with our military being portrayed as a bunch of criminals and thinks it's crying to expect them to tell good stories and pay attention to soldiers that receive medals while alive.

Most true conservatives like myself, are fine with both sides being presented and can recognize how unfair the media is even when we agree with their position.

You are a false

You are a false conservative. You are more than ok with tax and spend policies that get us no where. You are for bigger government. (Such as Homeland Security.) You dont' complain that we have wasted tax payer dollars and soldiers lives in Iraq, you only complain that the media doesn't spin in a more positive way. I think you have a guilty conscience and the only way you can assuage it is too call other people liberal, regardless of their position on economic and social issues. You don't even care to hear their positions on such subjects, just disagreeing with you over some stupid newbusters post is enough to make them a liberal in your eyes. You better look at yourself before calling someone else a liberal.

A "true conservative like yourself?" HA!

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

 

Huh?

Actually, you would be the "false conservative", because no conservative I know want America to be the pushover wimp nation you so ache for it to be.  

And Homeland Security is a waste of money?  It kills you to see ANY laws enforced in this country, doesn't it?  This nation cannot take any steps to defend itself without you throwing an absolute temper tantrum. 

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

This is why I question your

This is why I question your conservative credentials. Since when is it a conservative position to advocate more and bigger bureaucracies? I thought it was liberals that wanted big government?

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

 

Shoot me

I'm all about smaller bureaucracy, but I am one of those weird people who have no problem with the government enforcing laws, delivering mail, and (gasp!) defending the country.  Shoot me.    

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

»→ Shot

Government enforcing laws?

Brilliant!

  • LYDSEXICS UNTIE

Nope

The Left and the media wants us to FAIL and FAIL MISERABLY in Iraq, so no, I disagree wholeheartedly.  I am even more convinced of that than ever now that I have returned home.   

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

If it's any comfort, I'm on the Left and

If it's any comfort, I'm on the Left and I don't want us to fail.

Jer

Jer... And all this time

Jer...

And all this time I thought you were a neo-con.

"Abstain from McCain"

Well, Clear...

And all this time I thought you were a neo-con.

Well, Clear...that's because you lack my "superior ability to read people" which you recently so graciously acknowledged.

Jer

In your case...

Then you are an exception to the rule.   

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

Good...I like the sound of

Good...I like the sound of that.  [Not sure that I agree, however.]

Jer