You have no problem with the process, correct? Do I understand that correctly?
Nothing was illegal -- business as usual. In fact WMD was, as far as I can tell, the only legal way to go about a regime change. It would just be nice to go to war for the primary reasons most people thought we were going to war for at the time.
Frankly, I guess I’m the most aggravated out of all of this by the mainstream media. Not liberal, not conservative -- minor issues -- but lazy, co-opted and careerist. We have to have two versions of the truth in America, one for public consumption and one for the beltway. I am hardly a beltway insider, but I get/have gotten close enough to several public issues, and have spent enough time dealing with lobbyists and staffers and trade groups and special interest groups and federal agencies to see it first hand. The beltway version isn't really hidden, if you read a reputable newspaper beyond the Tempo and Sports sections you can find coverage, as you can in some of the specialty media outlets that concentrate on the beltway and political issues. The weekly newsmagazines give it coverage, but they are generally sloppy and have a well-deserved skepticism of their credibility. It's aggravating that both politicians and the broadcast media play along with the game, but they both know that the public has little patience for complication. This is not an opinion, it is something you learn early on in any marketing related coursework right around the time you encounter Maslow's Hierarchy of needs. Take too long educating, and you lose large percentages of audience.
Laziness and careerism. Talk to two groups on either side of an issue, get the party line spin, present both as “balanced” journalism and call it a day. Better yet, find extremists to liven up the show. Don’t dig, don’t complicate, don’t confuse. You’ve clawed your way to a solid six-figure salary, you go to all the beltway parties (you’re part of the scene - see Almost Famous for a feel), you are increasingly becoming a media celebrity, there’s potentially that big anchor job down the road -- why ask questions that are going to get your access chopped. You don’t want to be the only one reporting what the “spokesman” said while all of your peers/competitors got a face to face with the actual secretary of what not, even though they reported 99 percent spin in the process. Pisses off the boss. Don’t ask too many tough questions, or you lose your front row seat to the invasion imbed (brilliant work by Karen Hughes co-opting critical coverage with that carrot/stick) or you’re not invited to the final pre war press conference like Helen Thomas. Ask bland questions and if the President doesn’t give you specifics on cost (human or economic) or timeframes don’t push the point.
Actually, it’s all just a personal problem. As a humble trade journalist I write for an audience of experts. I have little room for laziness or error. My goal is to provide value, and I have to work hard to provide value to people who have forgotten more about the industry than I know. That means quality sources, constantly looking for spin, looking for the exception to the rule, looking for the truth behind the subject -- you don’t see that in mainstream journalism beyond some print and documentary coverage. What are you going to do. We are not a population of economic, domestic or foreign policy experts - myself included. It takes a lot of work and interest just to get somewhat up to speed on some of these areas, and it’s an ongoing process to stay there.
Politicians and the media give the public exactly what they ask for. We broadly get the government, and the policies we deserve. I had to search the channels for the debate in Congress over Gulf War I. It was barely covered. As I remember it was playoff season, but it was hard to find elsewhere as well. You could try and force “proper” journalism down peoples’ throats and they would just turn the channel or turn off the tube. Again, just a personal problem based on some unrealistic, idealist view of how we should function as a people and government.
Charon