Ordinary Americans See Iraq War In Clearer Light Than Media Elite
By RAGHAVAN MAYUR
Investor's Business Daily Editorial
Posted Wednesday, March 14, 2007
News about the Iraq War comes mostly these days in two distinct flavors — "bad" and "worse."
One may easily conclude from reading the headlines that things are so bad that most Americans would certainly want out of Iraq — and fast — seeing it as a lost cause that has done nothing but waste time, treasure and lives.
But do Americans really want to "cut and run" and leave the Iraqis to their own devices? Are they as selfish and shortsighted as that might suggest? Not by a long shot.
According to the latest IBD/TIPP poll, a majority of Americans recognize that the U.S. still has a lot of work left to do in Iraq. For example, the vast majority (82%) believe it's important for the U.S. and coalition countries to continue training Iraqi security and police forces.
Beyond showing common sense, these findings also show that ordinary Americans are concerned about the security not only of our troops but also of Iraqis — people who, for the most part, they have little relation to or interaction with.
Furthermore, our poll also found that 75% of Americans believe the U.S. should continue to provide economic aid to Iraq. And 71% believe we should continue to help rebuild Iraq's infrastructure.
Interestingly, these percentages have remained consistent since June 2005, when we first started polling on these issues. What's more, when they first appeared two years ago, they generated considerable surprise among fellow pollsters who were used to seeing poll numbers that painted a darker picture.
If nothing else, our figures demonstrate the compassion and generosity of the American people. They also demonstrate to me, as a pollster, that ordinary Americans see the war in Iraq, and the consequences of our actions or inaction in Iraq, in a clear light — clearer, perhaps, than the nation's media elites. Many of them seem to prefer to report on the negatives rather than the positives, and their analyses tend to always cast a dark shadow on reality.
This bias is pervasive.
Out of a random sampling of about 75 war-related news headlines drawn from 2006, 80% generally had a negative view of the war, while about 20% had some positive undertones.
I haven't yet done any statistical analyses on this year's headlines. But one that accompanied a CNN story Tuesday night read, "Poll: Less than half of Americans think U.S. can win in Iraq."
Do such headlines help anyone? Remember, we're in the middle of a war; we are not playing games.
According to the CNN story, 46% of Americans said the U.S. could not win the war in Iraq, while another 46% said that the U.S. could win. The writer went on to say this marks the first time since the war began four years ago that a majority of Americans said that the U.S. could not win.
While the negative spin is obvious, CNN fails to tell the whole story. Our IBD/TIPP Poll shows two-thirds believe victory in Iraq is important, while a third (35%) are "very hopeful" we can win and 23% are "somewhat hopeful" the U.S. can pull it off.
That's a very different take on the same issue.
Or consider another finding from the CNN poll — that about 60% want to see U.S. troops leave Iraq either immediately or within a year. Our poll, however, shows that about two-thirds (65%) say it's important for the U.S. to maintain a military presence in the country over the next 12 months.
Despite an obviously liberal and negative bias plainly visible to the American public (61% of Americans say war coverage is not fair and objective, 57% say that it's been too negative and 56% say coverage tends to favor a liberal point of view), most media elites continue to deny any bias at all.
Here's veteran journalist Dan Rather on the subject: "I am biased — I have a very strong bias toward independent journalism . . . Some of what you describe as 'baggage' comes from people who have the following view: Their view is, 'You report the news the way I want it reported or I'm going to make you pay a price and hang a sign around your neck saying you're a bomb-toting Bolshevik.' "
Or consider Tom Brokaw's take: "The idea that we would set out, consciously or unconsciously, to put some kind of an ideological framework over what we're doing is nonsense."
But for every high-profile denial of media bias, we also have several high-profile affirmations of bias — from the president on down:
• "We're making good progress in Iraq. Sometimes it's hard to tell it when you listen to the filter." — George W. Bush
• The media's "falsely bleak picture weakens our national resolve, discourages Iraqi cooperation and emboldens our enemy. The harm done by our media, I'm afraid it is killing our troops." — Rep. Jim Marshall, D.-Ga.
Even media insiders have taken notice of this bias:
• "Some of the most powerful media players in America don't want America to succeed in Iraq . . . American soldiers have told me that the biggest morale challenge that they are facing is not Saddam and Osama's thugs. Rather, it's dealing with the biased, slanted reports that they're getting from American news organizations." — Joe Scarborough, MSNBC
One has to wonder with so many in the media taking an anti-war (and anti-Bush) stance, is there something more going on beyond an expression of a deeply ingrained ideology?
Consider that today's media basically consist of people from two generations: one that was old enough to remember, and perhaps participate in, the Vietnam War protests, and one that was too young during Vietnam to have done much of anything that was war-related.
But with all the talk comparing Iraq to Vietnam, the focus on war protesters rather than war supporters, and the animus toward President Bush and sometimes even toward our troops, one has to wonder if some in the media are trying to relive at least part of the 1960s and 1970s, which have taken on an iconic aura for the liberal anti-establishment.
When all is said and done, all anyone is really expecting from the mainstream media is to set aside petty politics and offer some honesty in reporting and some faith in America's good intentions. Especially in a time of war.
Whether you are for the war or against it, the reality is that U.S. soldiers are on the ground in Iraq and that this is but one front in a war against civilization as we know it.
Mayur is president of TIPP, a unit of TechnoMetrica Market Intelligence, IBD's polling partner.
ibdeditorial.com |
