[Media-watch] Embedded journalists

[John Meed]

Embedded journalists ­ going native?

A major development in media management by UK/USA forces in the current Iraq
invasion is the policy of Œembedding¹ journalists in active military units.

It is notoriously difficult for journalists to retain an Œobjective¹ view of
their subject at the best of times. In war it is harder still. David Miller
(1), writing about the 1991 Gulf War, comments:

ŒIn 1991 the pentagon tried to bully journalists not to operate outside the
pool and some adopted the value system so fully that they turned in any
journalists who tried to report independently.¹

The process of embedding journalists into operational units can only
increase this tendency. Journalists interviewed about their role comment
that they share the daily life, rations and inconveniences of the soldiers.
Their satellite communication equipment can make them a valued information
source within the unit. It is indeed increasingly common to see BBC and ITV
journalists wearing the same uniforms as their military colleagues.

In such circumstances it is hardly surprising for a journalist to become
sympathetic with the plight of soldiers whose daily problems they share.
What is more, the embedded journalist¹s perception of the war is limited to
their immediate surroundings. It would hardly seem necessary for the UK/USA
command to formally censor their reports ­ it is hardly likely that
journalists operating in these conditions will readily file reports painting
a broader picture let alone looking critically at the war objectives.

I was therefore interested to hear the following comment made by Phillip
Rochot (2), a respected reporter for France 2 (the French equivalent of the
BBC) who is currently working independently in Iraq:

ŒEmbedded journalists do a fair amount of voluntary self-censorship,
controlling what they say. In any case their views are closely aligned with
the anglo-american position. They are soldiers of information, marching with
the troops and the political direction of their country. They won¹t say
anything wrong, they feel duty-bound to defend the anglo-american cause in
this war.¹

Someone else who¹s convinced is Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, who has
said of the embedded journalists that (3):

ŒThe imagery they broadcast is at least partially responsible for the
public's change of mood with the majority of people now saying they back the
coalition.¹

But then I suppose it was his idea.

John Meed, 31/3/03

(1) Eliminating Truth: The Development Of War Propaganda, by David Miller
March 28, 2003, Z Net
(2) Phillipe Rochot, France 2 ­ quoted during Interception, France Inter, 30
March 2003
(3) Richard Keeble:  ŒWe see more and more of the conflict, but we know as
little as ever¹ in Independent on Sunday, 30 March 2003