>From WashPo's SLATE's news summary today: >The New York Times leads with and Los Angeles Times top-non local spot goes to the offensive in western Iraq, involving about 1,000 Marines, armor, and airstrikes. At least according to military officials in Baghdad, about 100 insurgents were killed. The LAT says three Marines were killed and about twenty wounded. ...
>The main thing to keep an eye out for in dispatches about military offensives isn't anything in the stories themselves. It's the datelines. The LAT is the only one of the Big Five filing from the Marines' battle. The difference in coverage is stark. >With their reporters presumably stuck in Baghdad, the other papers basically channel military spokesmen accounts. Skepticism does not abound, nor does careful sourcing. "MARINES KILL 100 FIGHTERS IN SANCTUARY NEAR SYRIA," announces the [Washington] Post. That figure has issues. As you might notice, most of the papers' stories actually cite "as many as" 100 insurgents killed. (Kind of like [the author of this column] is "as much as" 6ft. tall). Then turn to the LAT, which quotes the commander in the field puzzling over the hundred figure and saying "a couple of dozen" insurgents were probably killed. >That's only the beginning of the differences. In contrast to the other papers' progress-centered picture, the LAT says the Marines were getting ready to attack one town when they were hit from another by dug-in insurgents, some of whom were wearing body armor. "Machine-gun fire lighted dozens of windows and doorways like strobes," says the LAT. In one house, hiding insurgents shot and killed a Marine through holes in floorboards. "This is a dedicated enemy that needs to be rooted out," said the Marines' local commander. "That could take days, or weeks, or months." >Finally, the LA Times points out that with essentially no Iraqi forces in Western Iraq, the Marines there are undermanned. One of the four battalions there has recently been removed and each of the remaining ones is missing a company. "We require more manpower to cover this area the way we need to," said one "military official." >... For what it's worth: The Chicago Tribune [which owns the LAT] also has a reporter on the scene. He had a revealing piece yesterday focused on how the Marines were taken by surprise. Presumably, the Trib will have his latest dispatch posted sometime this morning. < -- Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://myweb.lmu.edu/jdevine
