Add to that the fact that most interpreters are ex-baathist "minders" and you realize that the filtering is really dark.....Source on that? Sounds unlikely, on the surface.
The media kept the interpreters they had under Saddam. They reported back to the Government under Saddam. After the war, they claimed they were "forced" to do the job, and begged to be kept on. Since they knew English, and the reporters knew them, most were kept on. This has been commented on many times.
Useless in the sense that they don’t say what you want to hear, yes. I don’t think those Ollie North interviews on Fox are any better. No less spun, just a different spin.
"Apples and Oranges," Steven. Al Jeraaza has been caught many times "setting up" phony stories. They are very "pro-Sunni" and anti Kurd and Shiite. They get invited in and participate in many terrorist activities. Same with a lot of the other Arab media there. It's so bad that Powell has publicly complained about it. Ollie North presents a "pro-american" positive viewpoint. His reports are true, but about the positive things going on. The other Western media reports are true, but go at things from a negative framework.
The Iraqi blogs I read are obviously true. You can pick up the "mindprint" after a while. They are secular Iraqis, of middle class BG, who give you a "slice of life" of the situation.
The astounding thing we are getting is the reports from the military blogs. This is brand new to war. The average grunt can email and have it printed, and the good writers are setting up blogs. The Marine Corps has been the best about letting the troops post what they want. They are happy about what they are accomplishing over there, and mad as hell at the major media. |
