portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting global

alternative media | media criticism

war coverage spinsanity

LA Times change in coverage
 http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/11/06/1068013331454.html

"The Los Angeles Times has ordered its journalists to stop describing anti-American forces in Iraq as resistance fighters, saying the term
romanticises them and evokes World War II-era heroism."

"An email circulated this week asked staff to instead use the terms insurgents or guerillas."

I remember at the outset of the war, there was a lot of talk in the media about how this isn't an "invasion" but a "liberation", and under no circumstance should our troops be referred to as an "occupying force". But nowadays on NPR, every morning it's "more US soldiers were killed today during the occupation of Iraq". I often find myself wondering, "so are these the same soldiers that died yesterday or new ones?".

Since I don't own a TV it'd be interesting to know how their language has changed if at all. It's kind of funny... my mental image of TV coverage is 24 hours of a shot of the flag waving with marching band music, like they used to show in the 80's when TV would sign off at 3 am.
freedom fighters 07.Nov.2003 17:19

dude

the folks that kiked the brits out of india were called "freedom fighters." Perhaps that is what the iraqi opposition
should be called. Further-the US troops would be more appropriately called the "red coats." Historical perspective
is too much for the media to report.

No TV huh? 07.Nov.2003 18:53

Macky

Actually the flag and marching music have been blended with the content to provide the same effect sumbliminally. Pretty flag oooooh! Souza marches mmmmmm. Hummer good...............