"Sainthood" in Iraq

Pajamas is reporting this morning on the myopia at the Los Angeles Times regarding just what constitutes a free press in Iraq. (Could bloggers like Iraq the Model be part of it? The Times acts as if they never heard of them.) A great hue and cry has been let out recently over whether nefarious US sources (that dreaded Pentagon, among others) are unfairly influencing Iraqi media. Of course, no one at the NYT or the LAT is mentioning the obvious – that the same kind of “influencing” has been going on on all sides in virtually every war since there were newspapers (and probably in cuneiform, if you look hard enough). In fact, it might be said that our side was remiss if we did not do these things. We certainly did during World War II when the enemy was also ruthless and fascist. But now, of course, certain of our media satraps require “saintly” behavior from our side during war. The other side is allowed to lop people’s heads off while we are not allowed to even pay a journalist (assuming we did, which isn’t even clear). The same NYT that is making a big deal about this is the paper that would not give back Walter Duranty’s Pultizer after it was shown he lied about millions of deaths in the Ukraine. How can we even begin to take this nonsense seriously? Propaganda comes from all sides during war. Bias is everywhere. It is up to the discerning reader to make heads or tails of it.

But speaking of Iraqi coverage, look for some interesting developments in the next days from Pajamas Media regarding their forthcoming election on December 15. We’re going to be doing something special for it. Will we be unbiased? I doubt it. Who is? But at least we will be offering something you won’t find at the New York Times. I can guarantee you that.