Despite arguments over the quality of embedded journalism, that type of coverage is the future for war correspondents, journalism professors said.
Throughout Operation Iraqi Freedom, reporters have been embedded with troops from every branch of the U.S. military. The Department of Defense reported more than 500 journalists embedded in Iraq.
Major networks, both public and cable, spent hours reporting from these companies. Matthew Cecil, assistant professor of journalism and mass communication, said there has been too much embedded journalism.
So much time was used covering the troops, the context of the war was never clearly developed, Cecil said. The time with the troops grew to be more about the heat, sandstorms or personal business, such as births and anniversaries.
"You didn't see much, you didn't get much," he said.
Despite the problems with embedded journalism, there are many strengths of having the war covered from the troops' perspective, said David Edger, visiting political science professor through the CIA's Officer in Residence program. The military seen on television were unable to administer questionable practices or treat prisoners of war unfairly. The military was forced to fight a clean war, avoiding the tactics they may have used without the cameras pointed at them, he said.
The good part of embedded journalists is the firsthand look at what is going on, something that should not be forgotten, said Gerry Howard, visiting broadcast journalism professor.
"It takes the politics out of the footage," Howard said.
Unlike Vietnam, where journalists had to submit tapes to a main site that delayed the news, or Operation Desert Storm, where footage was only through the Department of Defense, this war provided unedited coverage without political influence, he said
One of the suspected reasons the Pentagon was in favor of embedded journalists, Howard said, was the influx of cameras among citizens. Without embedded journalists, Iraqis with cameras could show bombed out buildings and injuries without any footage to counter it, Howard said.
"We have to counterbalance the news," he said.
Despite the upfront reporting, the reports were still sterile, Cecil said. The only fighting seen on television was the fighting from the U.S. troops. This is where Vietnam's footage provided a better picture of war, he said.
"We saw the dirty, nasty side of war that we didn't get to see, even with embedded journalists, in this war," Cecil said.
The embedded viewpoint should be part of the coverage in future wars but much less so than now, Cecil said.
The future of war coverage will likely include embedded journalists, Howard said. The bias will remain, but the non-filtering will as well, he said.
hello there & you too