My personal musings about anything that gets on my radar screen--heavily dominated by politics.


MSM Coverage of the Real Story

WaPo: In Iraq, Two Views: Hero or Villain, p. A20

NYTimes: Defiant Hussein, Lashing Out at U.S., Goes on Trial, page unclear, but not on front page of website (in honesty, the coverage of a "divided" Iraqi sentiment does warrant front page web coverage)

USAToday: Saddam pleads not guilty, court adjourned until Nov., page unclear, but not on front page of website

WashTimes: Saddam rejects 'so-called court', page unclear, front page of website

Now, not to harp on the whole "media bias" thing, but one has to wonder if the legitimate trial of a brutal dictator who the U.S. has recently deposed is worthy of front page coverage. The WashTimes thinks so; I wonder why the opinion of the other newspapers is so different.

Or, actually, the better question might be this: if there were a Democrat President, or even if this had been under the auspices of the United Nations, would this story warrant front page above the fold coverage. Or close.

In fact, when Slobo Milosevic was put on trial at the Hague, his arraignment warranted page 2 coverage. Not front, above the fold, but a bit more than page twenty.

Imagine the opposite: Saddam on Trial gets front page, above the fold; his image is on the lead story of every evening newscast; and the details that the prosecutor laid out very capably today
are on every lip as the country discusses the imposition of real justice in Iraq. Do you think that might have a little effect on the polls? Maybe?

Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?