On Saturday, June 3, a story ran on the L.A. Times Web site entitled "TV Reporters Decry Drop in Iraq Coverage."? In that story, James Rainey wrote that reporters were feeling some of the same crunch that U.S. troops are going through. In what is a not too surprising yet horrible reality, it did in fact take the deaths of two CBS journalists, plus the near-death of Kimberly Dozier, for American network TV to realize that there is a war going on in the Middle East.

Rainey reported that coverage of the war in Iraq on network news had dropped 60 percent since the beginning of the war in 2003, according to numbers from this past April. Yet NBC News President Steve Capus was quoted as saying that NBC's coverage "was "extensive,"? giving an accurate depiction of what's going on over there."? If that isn't some serious PR spin, then I don't know what is.

Why is the coverage of the Iraq War falling on network news? Who really knows. Maybe it's because Brangelina just had a kid, or that gas prices continue to fly through the ceiling, or even" ?god forbid" ?there is still a controversy over Chris's elimination on American Idol (Get over it, the show's over until next time around).

To network execs, who some journalists think are caring less about the war and see it as somehow less important, remember that these soldiers are fighting so you can cover other nonsense such as the latest Paris Hilton gossip or Natalie Holloway. Don't get me wrong. I feel horribly for Natalie's family, but does it really need to be on TV everyday? When something new happens, report on it. Unfortunately, true journalists wouldn't be allowed to do that because the all-mighty dollar rules everything, and since that's the case, then the newest sighting of Michael Jackson is worth more than dead soldiers and civilians, which is absurd and downright wrong. Also, don't give me that we only have 30 minutes to cover the top stories garbage. Shows like ET were invented so that all of the celebrity gossip could be let out of the bag. Let them handle all of the celebrity escapades, because most of the people they cover live on a different planet than many average network TV news viewers anyway.

Here is another good piece of advice for network executives. If you can't get into a bad area of Iraq to cover the war, then STATE that upfront. Most people in this country like and respect honesty, so if you can't get into a certain region because it's too violent, then say so. Regardless of what the Pentagon wants you to think, it is extremely dangerous to cover certain parts of Iraq, even with the protection of U.S. troops. Unfortunately, the CBS crew found that out in a truly tragic way.

War is ugly and it needs to be covered, so don't let viewer apathy rule your life. The best way to get Americans out of their infinitesimal attention spans is to hit them with the facts and some good hard reporting.

SOURCE
L.A. Times Web site - "TV Reporters Decry Drop in Iraq Coverage." June 4, 2006