Wednesday, March 26, 2003

[7:49 PM] This article in Slate sums up better than I have the sanitized and limited scope of American television coverage of the war in Iraq.

As many viewers quickly figured out, if you watch the BBC or go prospecting on the Internet you get a more balanced and detailed picture. During and after Friday's "shock and awe" campaign, where American TV cameras generally kept a neutral middle distance, with no foreground but the CNN crawl, the BBC got right into the street-level thick of it—a British reporter poked around the rubble and broadcast images of Iraqi civilians in hospital beds. And the written reporting in the New York Times and elsewhere—John F. Burns' accounts from Baghdad, say—has been infinitely more vivid than most of what you see and hear on ABC.

Read the article here.

# posted 7:56 PM