An Armchair Tour of Media Reports on War's Anniversary

[LiberalHeart]

It's three years since the war in Iraq began with an attack that was billed as "shock and awe." It was aimed at finding and destroying weapons of mass destruction that could be used against America -- and there was the added hope of toppling Saddam and freeing the Iraqi people. A tour of major Web sites shows the mood and expectations in the U.S. now.

(snip)

A sampling of reports from media reports peppered across the Internet shows a U.S. president who stands firm in his resolve, but a citizenry that's growing increasingly fatigued by the on-gong conflict and less supportive of the invasion. At least that's the case if the president's poll numbers can be believed in those polls that link his handling of the situation in Iraq and his overall approval rating. In some polls, his approval, percentage-wise, is in the 40s. In others, it has dipped into the 30s.

To see what's causing this sea change in public opinion, take a look at what major news sources are saying in their coverage of the war's 3-year anniversary:

Much more here:
http://www.wtol.com/Global/story.asp?S=4653147

[Nostradammit]

1. Message: If it weren't for the media, people would know how swell it is

in Iraq.

This is a piece of tripe.

[LiberalHeart]

2. We see this in exactly opposite ways...

The article summarizes and links to many sites that have stories critical of the war. I don't know how you came away from it with the impression you have.

[Nostradammit]

3. Well,

"At least that's the case if the president's poll numbers can be believed in those polls that link his handling of the situation in Iraq and his overall approval rating."

???


"Interestingly, ABC News notes that despite an apparent drop-off in public support for the war, "demonstrations since the conflict in Iraq began are smaller than those which preceded the war."

????

"Also mentioned in the story was a demonstration staged outside Vice President Cheney's house, but they point out none of the protests compared to the Vietnam-era protests seen in Washington, DC."

?????

Sorry to be so blunt, this just feels to me to be very subtle propaganda.

Maybe your read is the correct one. I'm a bit irritable these days.

[LiberalHeart]

4. On the other hand....

"At least that's the case if the president's poll numbers can be believed in those polls that link his handling of the situation in Iraq and his overall approval rating."
???

**I believe that was written because the previous sentence stated what could be read as a fact, but it could also be read as an opinion. I think the author was providing the support for his/her statement (i.e. the polls).


"Interestingly, ABC News notes that despite an apparent drop-off in public support for the war, "demonstrations since the conflict in Iraq began are smaller than those which preceded the war."
????

**That looks to me like the author is highlighting the irony of dwindling support coming at a time when fewer people are protesting. Seems like the support would have been less when so many more were taking to the streets.

"Also mentioned in the story was a demonstration staged outside Vice President Cheney's house, but they point out none of the protests compared to the Vietnam-era protests seen in Washington, DC."
?????

**The author is just telling you two things that were mentioned at the link provided in the story. I don't think it reflects the author's point of view. This is just an overview of what major media outlets are saying. Soooo, protesters did care enough to demonstrate outside Cheney's home, but the numbers weren't like those in the Vietnam erea. Then the author points out this could be because of the difference between then and now: no draft now.

Sorry to be so blunt, this just feels to me to be very subtle propaganda.

**I appreciate your bluntness. Makes me look at the piece anew, trying to see it from your point of view. Maybe it's propaganda and just goes over my head. But I read it as just a broad look at what hit the news today on the anniversary, with some attention drawn to how the mood in the country has shifted in three years. As for the shift, my feeling is that it's about time.

Maybe your read is the correct one. I'm a bit irritable these days.

**Funny how a war can do that to us, eh? I'm in the same boat, m'dear.

[Nostradammit]

5. I'll just break this one part down -

A sampling of reports from media reports peppered across the Internet shows a U.S. president who stands firm in his resolve (Standing firm in his resolve, what a good leader!) , but a citizenry that's growing increasingly fatigued by the on-gong conflict and less supportive of the invasion (If we were stronger, we wouldn't tire so easily and would be more supportive of such a worthy cause). At least that's the case if the president's poll numbers can be believed in those polls that link his handling of the situation in Iraq and his overall approval rating (And who can believe such claptrap!). In some polls, his approval, percentage-wise, is in the 40s. In others, it has dipped (You know, dipped - temporarily lowered but soon to be raised)into the 30s.

[LiberalHeart]

6. I'll do the same....

A sampling of reports from media reports peppered across the Internet shows a U.S. president who stands firm in his resolve (bullheaded ol' coot refuses to see the mess he's made, won't admit mistakes, let alone war crimes), but a citizenry that's growing increasingly fatigued by the on-gong conflict and less supportive of the invasion (Americans are so sick and tired of the killing and maiming and lies, they're no longer getting on the rah-rah bandwagon of "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here"). At least that's the case if the president's poll numbers can be believed in those polls that link his handling of the situation in Iraq and his overall approval rating (And there does seem to be a strong case of cause and effect). In some polls, his approval, percentage-wise, is in the 40s. In others, it has dipped (the bottom has fallen out of the prez's popularity)into the 30s.

I think it's interesting how we can look at the same thing and see it so differently.

[Nostradammit]

7. I appreciate the discussion, it is interesting to see the differences

In the first place, this TV station is part of a media empire, so right off the bat I'm leary of anything they might publish. Here's a list of their TV stations (many of them FOX affiliates):



* KCBD - Lubbock, TX (145)
* KHBC - Honolulu, HI (72)
* KHNL - Honolulu, HI (72)
* KOGG - Honolulu, HI (72)
* KPLC - Lake Charles, LA (124)
* KWWL - Waterloo, IA (88)
* WAFF - Huntsville, AL (84)
* WALB - Albany, GA (147)
* WAVE - Louisville, KY (50)
* WDAM - Hattiesburg, MS (167)
* WECT - Wilmington, NC (139)
* WFIE - Evansville, IN (99)
* WIS - Columbia, SC (83)
* WLBT - Jackson, MS (91)
* WLUC - Marquette, MI (180)
* WMC - Memphis, TN (44)
* WNWO - Toledo, OH (70)
* WPBN - Traverse City, MI (113)
* WSFA - Montgomery, AL (116)
* WSTM - Syracuse, NY (76)
* WTOM - Traverse City, MI (113)

* KFVS - Cape Girardeau, MO (77)
* KGBT - Harlingen, TX (92)
* KOLD - Tucson, AZ (71)
* KSLA - Shreveport, LA (81)
* WAFB - Baton Rouge, LA (96)
* WOIO - Cleveland, OH (16)
* WTOC - Savannah, GA (97)
* WTOL - Toledo, OH (70)
* WTVR - Richmond, VA (60)



* KAIT - Jonesboro, AR (179)
* KLTV - Tyler, TX (111)
* KTRE - Lufkin, TX (111)
* KTVO - Kirksville, MO (199)
* WLOX - Biloxi, MS (158)
* WTVM - Columbus, GA (127)

* KASA - Albuquerque, NM (46)
* KXRM - Colorado Springs, CO (93)
* WACH - Columbia, SC (83)
* WDFX - Dothan, AL (172)
* WFLX - West Palm Beach, FL (38)
* WFXL - Albany, GA (147)
* WPGX - Panama City, FL (157)
* WTNZ - Knoxville, TN (58)
* WXIX - Cincinnati, OH (34)

* KXTU - Colorado Springs, CO (93)
* WBXH - Baton Rouge, LA (96)
* WSTQ - Syracuse, NY (76)
* WUAB - Cleveland, OH (16)
* WQTV - Cape Girardeau, MO (77)
* WQWQ - Cape Girardeau, MO (77)

* KFVE - Honolulu, HI (72)

If I wanted to suggest that Bush is a bullheaded ol' coot I would not use the phrase "stands firm in his resolve."

If I wanted to describe the citizenry as sick and tired of the killing and the maiming and lies I would go way, way beyond "growing increasingly fatiqued" and "less supportive."

Why even question the veracity of the polls if you want to suggest that there is a strong case of cause and effect?

Dipped? How about Plunged? How about Sunk? How about Plummeted?


Hope I didn't kill your thread - that wasn't my intention!

[LiberalHeart]

8. I think folks just aren't intrigued by the headline....

...or they've seen enough of the anniversary coverage.

...or you and I have peculiar taste -- we're in a class of our own.

The owners of that TV station didn't acquire it until last month. I think most TV stations are owned by folks who own several. At least they aren't Sinclair Broadcasting.

About the polls: Bush still has a ways to go. I'm waiting none too patiently for him to hit zero.

[Nostradammit]

9. Here's to Zero!

:toast:

Lovely chatting with you ~

[LiberalHeart]

10. Time to go to sleep now...

Nearly 4 AM where I live. Thanks for a nice exchange.