A U.S. Army battalion commander and his Command Sergeant Major were relieved of duty the other day in Afghanistan. For Canadian readers, this news is notable because a) the Lieutenant Colonel in question was working in Arghandab and reported to the Canadian Task Force commander, and b) because as far as I can tell, not a single Canadian journalist reported on it.
BruceR at Flit, back from a tour in Kandahar himself, asks the pointed, but obvious question:
...given that this is the most significant thing to happen at KAF in nearly a month, and undoubtedly a prime gossip item in every coffee line there, I'm kinda surprised none of our Canadian pool reporters there had picked up on it yet, and left it to a guy at the Fayetteville Observer back home to get the scoop. Kinda reminds me of when Jim Day, working for the tiny Pembroke Ontario daily (also called the Observer) heard about the Somalia allegations first. Desk editors here in Canada might want to get someone to check the huts to see if their reporters are under the weather. If they are conscious, questions they might want to forcefeed them would include: was Canadian task force commander BGen Menard consulted on the Americans' decision to fire his immediate subordinate? Did he request it himself? etc. (I'm sure things were at sixes and sevens after the tragic loss of reporter Michelle Lang to an IED four weeks ago, Haiti, etc., but surely some arrangements have been made to keep press coverage in Afghanistan going. This strongly suggests they're not working.)
I've been at KAF and Camp Nathan Smith, and I've sat where the journalists hang out and file stories. I know they face some challenges navigating officialdom and digging down to the real ground-level stories in Kandahar. Perhaps all of them are out on the ground, patrolling with the Battle Group or with the CIMIC guys from the KPRT or at a FOB. Perhaps that's why they didn't catch this story, and were scooped by that media giant, the Fayetteville Observer.
But I suspect not. In my experience, the single biggest obstacle for many of them is that they haven't figured out what they're covering or how to cover it. By that I mean they don't know what's important in a counterinsurgency and/or nation building mission, and what's a red herring. So we get a lot of news stories that tell us sweet f-all about what's really going on. And to compound that problem, they don't know where to go to get their information. They have little familiarity with military culture, and so don't know how to build trust with the troops.
The funny thing is, the troops understand the value of talking to the press and make efforts to bridge the gap at every point they can. It's just not enough in every case.
Either way, as BruceR pointed out, the Canadian media in Kandahar seem to have broken down en masse today, to the detriment of the Canadian public's understanding. Time for the MSM to pick up their game.
To bad a good seventy percent of Canadian's have already relieved the MSM of duty. They may as well pitch a tent in the Taliban camp for all the bad press our troops receive. Except when arriving home in a metal box.
Damian wrote, "But I suspect not. In my experience, the single biggest obstacle for many of them is that they haven't figured out what they're covering or how to cover it. By that I mean they don't know what's important in a counterinsurgency and/or nation building mission, and what's a red herring. So we get a lot of news stories that tell us sweet f-all about what's really going on. And to compound that problem, they don't know where to go to get their information. They have little familiarity with military culture, and so don't know how to build trust with the troops."
Here's some support for your suspicion.
"An Oozing Of Gray Sludge, Reflections On Our Media of Communication" by Fred Reed
"Why are the media not very good?
In thirty years of in the writing trades, I’ve covered a lot of things, but three in particular: The military, the sciences, and the police. For years I had a military column syndicated by Universal Press Syndicate and later carried by the Army Times papers until I was fired for political incorrectness....
This isn’t my first rodeo.
In each case the reporters I met were, with very few exceptions, pig ignorant. The military reporters didn’t know the history, the weaponry, the technology, strategy, tactics, or how soldiers work. Almost none had served....
Over the years I’ve noticed several things. First, in print publications, most reporters aren’t very smart. A few are very bright, but probably through a mistake in hiring. (The prestigious papers are exceptions, hiring Ivy League snots of the sort who viscerally dislike soldiers, cops, rural people, guns, etc.) "
It's from 2004. The rest of the article is worth reading.
If you are waiting for the MSM to get their shit together I hope you are not holding your breath.
we used to say "if you can't do it , teach"
now it's become "if you can't do it , report"
Thank you for the link, Looking Glass.......most interesting.
nothing to see here, move along folks.
I honestly do not think this an "asleep at the switch" issue.
Much more likely that it is an "I don't have enough of a clue about the military to know that something unusual happened" issue.
Even curiouser when it would play to canadian vanity of a Canadian relieving an american for fostering an inappropriate atmosphere.
Of course one explaination is this runs counter to the current meme that Canadian soldiers engage in war crimes in Afghanistan. So now you have conflicting narratives, Canada more ehtical than the US vs Canadian Soldiers commit war crimes. Look at which one wins!
Afghanistan, for the bulk of Canadian media, is a checkbox on the resume. Very few, if any, are interested in covering the story - its more about being nosy, about being abe to say, "I did a stint in-theater", rather than any hard-nosed journalism. A good many media types don't even know who they are - I was struck recently by a local girl who does glitz media reporting, fluff and occasional weather, extolling how her background prepared her for her "role as a journalist".
I hate to break it to her, but being a news reader or a talking head pumping sound bites doesn't make you a journalist.
Partly this is why I was quite affected by the Michelle Lang story - here was a girl who actually was on the learning curve to being a decent journalist, but so out of her depth in heading to A'stan.
Moving from covering issues within the protection of the nanny state and for which persec isn't even a concern, to issues for which personal security is 80% of the story is waaay beyond the ken of many reporters, and apparently their editors. I wonder how many reporters in A'stan are now actually cowering as a result of the Lang event?
My uncle John, who served with the Canadian Army in
WWII and in Korea, told me that the Canadian newspaper coverage of the Korean war was written in
the bars of Tokyo. The only Canadian reporter ever seen on or near a battlefield was Pierre Berton, whom my uncle greatly respected for that reason.
It's good to see that press corps traditions are still respected :-(
Time for a Fox News Franchise in Canada.
Would be nice Abe, but where would they find enough Canadian on air talent that leans right to fill a broadcast day?
"But I suspect not. In my experience, the single biggest obstacle for many of them is that they haven't figured out what they're covering or how to cover it."
That makes sense as the western forces there haven't a clue who the enemy is, how to defeat them or what victory would look like.
FOX News, now there is an oxymoron. Fox News, more like right wing rhetoric and fantasy.
You mean there is more to reporting than just waiting around to cut and paste the press releases? Naaaawwwww, go on with you.
They're too busy not covering Canadian and Allied infrastructure programmes to cover it.
[...In each case the reporters I met were, with very few exceptions, pig ignorant. The military reporters didn’t know the history, the weaponry, the technology, strategy, tactics, or how soldiers work. Almost none had served....
Over the years I’ve noticed several things. First, in print publications, most reporters aren’t very smart. A few are very bright, but probably through a mistake in hiring. (The prestigious papers are exceptions, hiring Ivy League snots of the sort who viscerally dislike soldiers, cops, rural people, guns, etc.) "
]
That puts it about right.
No bars in A'stan = no stories filed.
i'm starting my own news bureau...i shall name it Henhouse News....
and our motto?
"when WE lay an egg we actually boast about it..."
Please leave command decisions to the Generals in charge in theatre.
Let's not even speculate.... as someone previously mentioned " Nothing to see here folks, keep moving".
All you arm chair generals can fold up your tin foil hats and troll elsewhere.
Leave soldiering to soldiers.
Sapper Bloggins: Well, we're not going to leave journalism to the journalists. As for one, not untypical, Canadian rising journo star:
"Globeite Doug Saunders still can't tell a US Marine from a soldier "
Mark
Ottawa
Simply put: too many Canadian journalists don't understand just what those "armymen" really do.
This makes for a stark cultural contrast with some of the scribblers and newshounds in the US, British and European media. Many of these often have a good grip on things military - even if they have an anti-military perspective. A number of them have actually served (could it be so?) in their nations' militaries at levels where they grasped concepts like command and control relationships, the staff system, operations, intelligence, logistics and so on.
If you're trying to figure out who's doing what to who in an operation, it helps to understand the difference between OPCOM and OPCON, or a TF, JTF and a CJTF.
I recall advice given to me by a Public Affairs officer long ago when I was on a course. I believe we were being briefed on some aspect of public relations.
The PAffO quipped: "Remember, that young reporter for the Podunk Herald is doing a dog show right after he finishes interviewing you. And he likely knows as much about dogs as he does about the Canadian Forces."
Interesting stuff. The canning of an elite unit BatCom and his CSM shortly after arriving in a war zone suggests some sort of "give them enough rope and they will finish hanging themselves" scenario.
I do believe that if the the level of journalism was at the level Christie Blatchford practiced, little nuggets like this story would be on the front pages.
I like Blatchford, she tells it like it is and also has a true affection and respect for the soldiers
C'mon you guys, how is a journalist supposed to journal without the obligatory press releases? I mean even the sap (Colvin or whatever) that 'uncovered' the detainee thing? Do you think for a minute that he did it without pressers?
Get serious. He was obviously still getting the stuff from the Libs and woke up late or found it in his inbox which he only recently got access too.
Heartless bunch.
I have come to like Blatchford ..... was not always the case.
As for the rest ..... effem.
Don't feed the....!
The canadian MSM are more interested in getting there comrades in the Liberal/Separatist/Ndp alliance "back to power"... It seems to me the MSM in Canada (Trudeauvia) are more inclined to create scandal where none exists and to further propagate an endless amount of political theatre such as "Porogiegate" or "Boobgate", Raittgate, or what did Mr. Harper do with that wafergate". The Canadian MSM considers Ret. Col. Drapeau an expert on all things military...enough said.
Sean M - you are absolutely correct. Nice summery.
I'd be interested to know why they turfed the guy. Too bad nobody seems to want to tell that part. Leaves one with dark suspicions, know what I mean?