Latest Posts
- Notice to “Spectator” readers
- So Long. Farewell. Auf wiedersehen. Goodbye.
- Magazine maven Bonnie Fuller poised to market her toughest brand yet: Herself
- John Macfarlane grabs The Walrus’s tiller
Tools
Categories
- General
- Bay Street
- Black Watch
- Television
- Radio
- Internet
- Newspapers
- Gossip Hound
- Egos
- Across the Ocean
- Over the Border
- Books
- Magazines
- American Election
- New York Times vs Wall Street Journal
- Gaffe of the Week
- Livent Trial
Postings by date
When it comes to the ethics of embedding journalists, Christie Blatchford misses the big picture (again)
Posted on June 2, 2008 by Douglas Bell
I spent last week working in L.A.—an experience like no other, one that could make even the most deluded dreamer crave Toronto’s low-ceilinged ambitions. On Monday, seeking to inoculate myself against the general lunacy abroad in the land, I attended a sober Memorial Day ceremony at the Los Angeles National Cemetery. And while even this event had its share of native nuttiness (among the colour guard was an outfit called the Sons of Confederate Veterans, complete with period costume and a confederate flag), I was still struck by the unironic and severe atmosphere that is central to such American commemorations. During the Pledge of Allegiance, every person present (save the odd interloper) enunciated the national creed loudly and clearly, right hand draped over heart: “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”
Then, following a flyover of vintage World War II fighters, came the most sombre moment of all: a short memorial for the most recent Californians killed in Afghanistan and Iraq (almost 500 to date), in the presence of their bereaved families. Each name was read out and marked, in naval tradition, by a single toll of a bell. Boy and Girl Scouts paraded photographs of the dead—many Hispanic, several Filipino—before the assembled. Each family was presented with a single red rose. The only other sound, beyond the traffic flowing along Highway 405, was sobbing. And while I recognize the entire event was to some degree theatre orchestrated by the Department of Defense (the assembled TV news trucks were testament to that), those sobs were unimpeachably real.
I mention all this in light of Christie Blatchford’s column in the Saturday Globe, wherein she countered the arguments of those concerned with the consequences of the so-called “embedded” reporting of war.
The program is of huge concern in journalism schools and to big thinkers, who argue that the practice doesn’t lend itself to traditional objective reporting and engenders too much familiarity.
As someone who has been embedded four times, I don’t agree, and consider far more dangerous the unacknowledged embedding that goes on in places like Ottawa and Washington, where reporters don’t spend a mere six weeks in close quarters with their subjects, but rather years and sometimes whole careers, and where they are regularly spun with a ferocity and a sophistication the Canadian army can only imagine, in the dampest of dreams, achieving.
Besides the obvious red herring (embedding with the army is bad, but it’s worse when reporters embed with the government—isn’t the army a branch of government?), Blatchford’s insouciant dismissal of these concerns misses the bigger picture. In his book on the Bush administration’s hoodwinking of the press and the public in taking the States into Iraq (The Greatest Story Ever Sold: The Decline and Fall of Truth in Bush’s America, Penguin 2007), Frank Rich describes the genesis of the embedding program:
The mastermind of the Pentagon media operation…was Torie Clark, a PR star whose resume included a stint at the National Cable Television Association…. Little in her Pentagon image portfolio would be left to chance: a production designer who had worked for Disney, MGM, Good Morning America and the illusionist David Blaine was hired to give General Tommy Franks a confidence-inspiring $200,000 set for the briefing at central Command headquarters in Qatar.
Embedding is a bad idea because it puts the reporter in league with exactly the sort of nonsense Rich is describing. Blatchford has her own reasons for wanting to live cheek by jowl with our overseas fighters—none of which, I suspect, has much to do with the real consequences of war.
• Lives remembered: California’s war dead profiled [L.A. Times]
• Blatchford’s Take: Grateful for my shallowness, as I watch dear friends retire [Globe and Mail]
- Back to Spectator Home
- Categories: General, Newspapers, Egos, Across the Ocean, Over the Border
- Permalink





Comments
Neither the author nor Toronto Life necessarily agree with the comments posted below. Editors will not correct spelling or grammar. Toronto Life reserves the right to edit or delete comments entirely. Read our full policy
You must register to post comments. Please register here.
jade_lee June 3, 2008 at 3:50 p.m.
The irony is that Blatchford has bought into the culture of war she is trying to evaluate, the culture of the soldiers who are ordered to participate blindly, as they are not really briefed beyond the immediate threat that lurks, and she is not even close to being of any kind of service to those trying to understand the big picture about these wars. She has become a shrill of the neocon movement I suppose, and it's being exposed for what it is as the US Nov 4th election approaches. It appears that rationalizing battle becomes the only way towards personal sanity when participating as a soldier in the field or one like Blatchford who rallies in print to legitimize this war in Afghanistan to Canadians. The battle plan is an illusion as we all have witnessed. There is no plan, war is reactionary in nature, my bomb is better than your bomb can go on forever, no? I want Blatchford to communicate what the people of Afghanistan think about the Canadian occupation/security/restructuring programs, whatever the NATO Canadian mission is accomplishing for the Afghan people now as life is short. Then at least she would be of value to the reader.
charley June 3, 2008 at 4:09 p.m.
Maybe she could volunteer to "embed" with Afghan government forces- might be somewhat more useful giving us a different perspective.
jade_lee June 4, 2008 at 12:53 a.m.
good suggestion!
Post a comment