Media attention on Afghanistan War is down

Here are excerpts from the following article, focusing on the relative lack of media attention to the futile and destructive US-led military occupation of Afghanistan.

America’s Forgotten War
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/americas_forgotten_war_20100528/
Posted on May 28, 2010
By Bill Boyarsky

Excerpts:

News on Afghanistan "war" lost amidst other crises: "...the oil spill, intractable unemployment and the rest—for it has definitely diverted attention from his biggest disaster: the Afghanistan war."

The lack of a serious debate and media attention on the Afghanistan quagmire is probably good for Obama, but bad for the country. Some reasons. "Casualties are rising, passing 1,000. The Afghanistan war’s cost in February alone was $6.7 billion, USA Today reported. At this rate, there may not be enough money to pay for the health care reform that Obama sees as his legacy.

Boyarsky refers to Pew Reserch Center survey findings. "For the week of May 17-23, Afghanistan was in seventh place in the overall standings. For newspapers, the war was 10th. It was seventh for online, sixth for network television and 10th for cable TV. Afghanistan coverage didn’t register for radio. The oil rig explosion, the 2010 elections, the economic crisis and the Mexican president’s Washington visit all occupied more space or time."

Tom Rosensteil, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, responds to a question from Boyarsky. "With the death toll rising and the number of Americans in Afghanistan increasing, why the poor coverage?....“'One factor is that, historically, if Americans—and the American news media is a reflection of them—have pressing domestic concerns … the domestic concerns seem to come out first,' he said."

Rosensteil added other reasons. (1) "War fatigue" from the years of coverage on the Iraq "war." (2) "mainstream news business is short of money...." "Covering a war is expensive." (3) "editors and other media managers don't think people are interested."

Furthermore: "...there’s not much political debate over the war, and without controversy there’s not much interest on the blogs and among cable’s so-called analysts, who have become more influential than old-fashioned reporters."

Moreover: "The few prominent opponents and critics of the war can’t catch their attention.
Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s resolution for withdrawal from Afghanistan within 30 days was defeated in the House. Peace candidates in the current election campaigns, such as Marcy Winograd, who is running against Rep. Jane Harman in a Democratic primary in Southern California, are scarce.
And there has been minimal coverage of legislation requiring President Obama to develop a flexible timetable for withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, introduced by Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and Reps. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., and Walter Jones, R-N.C. Obama has said he wants to begin withdrawing troops in July 2011, but that obviously isn’t a firm enough promise for Feingold. The senator also disagreed with Obama’s goal of denying al-Qaida “a safe haven,” stopping Taliban advances and strengthening Afghanistan’s government. This made little sense to Feingold, who said, “A large open-ended expensive military presence in Afghanistan is not the way to defeat al Qaeda.” He inserted the Feingold-McGovern measure as an amendment to a spending bill, but it was voted down, 18-80."