The Laughing Wolf

The Question Generally Missed About Fallujah

While I have been a bit caught up in my own affairs, I have been trying to find time to dig into some questions that came to mind as soon as I saw the news reports. Those were fine reports, they were, with clear professional video to show the horror and barbarity at its glorious best. So far, only three people have really gotten the question that came to my mind from the first: how did the media know to be there?

While I am not quite ready to call the hotel that is the home to most media-types in Baghdad the Caravelle, it is getting awfully tempting. The parallels are amazing, and extremely disconcerting. The fact is, the faces you see on the news don’t go out and search Baghdad and surrounding areas for good stories – they depend on others to tell them of the stories and don’t stray out of the hotel grounds that often. To go wandering around is dangerous, and to go where there is trouble and such is very, very dangerous. The safe thing to do, therefore, is to rely on PAO types and native bearers, I mean, native journalists/stringers to go do the searching and filming.

In far too many cases, those natives are the same helpful people that worked for Saddam and were in fact the minders and keepers of the press. They were the people who blocked them from reporting stories that Saddam did not want told, promoted the stories (remember that there is more than one meaning for this word) that he wanted told, and in general worked to block access to the truth. That such are now the main source of news for many of the Old Media speaks volumes and explains a lot of the coverage that comes out through them.

I don’t have answers to my questions, but will share those questions and some speculations with you.

First, where did the footage come from? Was it from a source who sold it to the networks? Was it from a stringer who just happened to be there? Was it from reporters who were there?

These are very important questions. Keep in mind that most of the broadcast faces spend most of their time at the hotel, and only venture out on specific errands. They are not the type to go roaming the streets looking for stories, and most especially not in Fallujah, where it has been made clear that they are NOT welcome. So, unless someone told them they would have a great story and safe passage, major reporters are not going to be there. Had they been there, you can rest assured they would have been seen.

Most likely, even if they were given such guarantees, they would not be there. Too easily a trap and too easily a way to get hurt or killed. What you do is send a native, since they can blend in, know the culture, etc. Remember also the mindset I have discussed before, where to the elites of the Old Media, they are wogs and expendable wogs at that. If they are hurt or killed, there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth for public consumption, and little else. Save some celebrating by the reporters and producers involved, who will be breathing huge sighs of relief that it was not them.

Still, the natives are not going to be there unless they knew that something big was going down, and that some promise of safety was made. Take a look at the murders and bombings of late – most are aimed at those who are cooperating one way or another. Any native reporter, especially one who was trying to live up to the standards of journalism, would in effect be wearing a bullseye. They are not stupid, and would not be there without some strong guarantees.

The footage shown could have come from just one crew, but there again comes the question of who and why? If it was one crew, then they were hired to be there.

Second, when did the media get tipped? Was it well before the event, so that a crew or crews could get there? Or were they offered the tape(s) later? Makes a difference in one important area – that of collusion. While journalists have long maintained that they have an obligation only to the truth, and some prominent members of the Old Media have stated in public that if they were filming with guerillas and had a chance to warn a U.S. patrol of an impending attack, they would not do so but simply film the result. Freedom of the Press is what they wrap themselves in on this, but that coat does not – in my opinion – fit. I will bow to the members of the Volokh Conspiracy on this, I am not a lawyer, but to my mind this does fall under aid and comfort to the enemy. Accessory before and after the fact at best, treason is more what comes to mind here. I want an answer to this, very badly.

Third, did any media organization pay anything before this started? Remember, one or more so-called media organizations have been disclosed as paying people for good footage. You know, like riots, rock throwing, and demonstrations against the Yankee oppressors and the like. I have to wonder what some media organizations would be willing to pay for filming a nice, juicy attack on American civilians?

Fourth, here is some speculation based on analysis. Look at the footage. Look at it. Ignore the center, look to the sides. This was staged, and there is a lot of acting going on. People are hamming it up. They are showing faces, they are making the grand theatrical gestures. They make no threats towards those filming, and it is clear that the person or persons filming are welcome and safe. All of which speaks volumes. I am willing to bet that those truly behind the attack are not in front of the camera, but they are there. They are just smart enough not to get in the frame, and to let those without much in the way of brains get all the exposure possible.

None of this is good, and most of all it is not good for the media, particularly the Old Media. The questions here are being ignored, and will be ignored as long as possible. What I see here is a mockery of journalism, and one of the reasons I am happy to no longer be associated with what passes for journalism today. What I see here is a betrayal of the principles of journalism and of the duties of a Citizen.

I want answers to my questions. I want them now. I want them in public. The media will avoid this unless they are held to the fire, and that is the duty of the New Media, and of the Citizens of the Republic and all other citizens anywhere who believe in life, liberty, and humanity. Most of all, those who are dedicated to a free press, a responsible press, must demand these answers. The reasons why should be obvious.

-30-