Last night at approximately 11pm, I noticed a “breaking news” headline on Fox News that read: “Explosions Rock Coalition HQ”. At that time, there was not yet an accompanying news story. Considering how significant an event this would be, I checked back frequently to get more info.
I could not find any mention of this incident on CNN or MSNBC, which may not mean anything since Fox News sometimes scoops these things before anyone else.
About 30 minutes later, the “breaking news” headline was gone, but there was no story. The main story was something like “Attacks Continue” or something lame like that, with a handful of subheadlines on various recent incidents in Iraq. The mention of an attack on the Coalition HQ was among the subheadings, but there was no mention of it in the body of the story. WTF.
Then, at about midnight, all mention of any attack on the Coalition HQ was completely gone. It was as if it never was in the news to start with.
So what am I to make of this? Fog of war? Erroneous reporting? There was no mention of a retraction or anything like that. Perhaps it was up too briefly to be considered worthy of a retraction.
So is there something going on at Coalition HQ or not? A number of news sites picked up the AP feed about it, and what little info there is suggests that it may have been a controlled ordnance disposal.
April 14th, 2004 at 2:48 am - Edit
I’ve noticed the same thing — details of violent events take a long time to show up in the press, and when they do they’re from troop interviews after the event. Sometimes AAR and similar publications come out providing details, but again these are reconstructions from troop interviews and forensic analysis.
I think we’re seeing a combination of the fog of war, and an unwillingness of war journalists to keep their heads (and cameras) up when the bullets start flying — something for which I can hardly blame them. But it is frustrating.
Many details of ODS didn’t come to public light until a few years later, when Army officers and thinktank professionals published papers after research in depth. I’ve pretty much resigned myself to having to wait a few more years to learn what’s going on today with OIF, too.
Matters are exacerbated by what seems to me to be the mainstream media painting the worst possible picture of events. I don’t trust what they say.
– TTK
April 14th, 2004 at 11:14 am - Edit
It’s true that the very nature of military operations will obscure the whole truth for many years following. There are obvious security risks involved there, and often there are things that go on that the government doesn’t really want to talk about.
A hindsight evaluation usually allows for a better overall context, since you can get the big picture. But I think combining that with on-the-ground accounts is important for perspective.
True, I don’t blame reporters for ducking, either. Although in this case I think fog of war may be responsible for the news grayout. Fallujah and Najaf are pretty active these days and the reporters are probably busy covering that.