- 1. This business of whether covering an event either changes or, in fact, creates the event has been around for a long time. During the riots of the 60’s in the US – when no one suggested we were about to collapse into a civil war – the discussion was: If there were no TV cameras, would the riots even happen?
- As there were TV cameras (film cameras, for the most part, in those days) we could never test the theory.
- 2. Non-Western media on the ground – including Al Jazzeera – were much less likely to give us the “on-the-brink-of-civil-war” construct. This, from an on-the-ground observer:
- Western press kept saying we were on the edge [of civil war], and made it out like it was going to happen at any time while the pan-Arab/Iraqi media were focusing more on statements from clerics and leaders.
- Pan-Arab outlets were putting the blame on the US, but not going on and on about civil war, while the Iraqi channels were talking about unity, etc.
- 3. The situation, although not calm, has stabilized a great deal and the Iraqis pretty much did it themselves. This, as opposed to the US moving in entire brigades, to do the job.
- 4. The news business at the front end of the 21st century, is built on a foundation of hyperbole: A swan drops dead in France and it is further evidence of the BIRD FLU PANDEMIC!
- 5. A piece about upgraded water systems, or increasing electricity supplies is not going to get a reporter on the front page of the NY Times nor at the top of the hour on CNN or Fox. About the second time a reporter brings in a story about the improving test scores of school children, or the re-emergence of the Iraqi middle class, he is going to be packed off to run the bureau in downtown Norway.