:
CBS's Coverage of Postwar Iraq

There has been analysis of the media's coverage of the 21-day war in Iraq in which it has been claimed that CBS News was even-handed in its covering of both positive and negative events throughout the military campaign. This is understandable and hardly surprising given President Bush's high approval ratings and the lack of controversy once the bombs fell.

Now that the bombs have stopped, we're in the period the media likes to call "winning the peace," which has already lasted far longer than the war itself. This second phase is much more controversial as Democrats and other critics of the president feel appropriate to renew their efforts as the opposition.

During the postwar "winning the peace" period of rebuilding in Iraq, CBS News has focused heavily on negative events in the country ignored or neglected positive news.

According to a study conducted by RatherBiased.com of news reports during four months from Bush's May 1 speech declaring an end to major operations in Iraq to Sept. 9 (130 days of occupation), the CBS Evening News ran 100 more negative stories than positive stories about events in Iraq. Out of 183 total stories, 132 were negative, 34 were positive, and 17 were neutral. A typical month is August, where negative stories outnumbered positive stories 40 to 5.

Reporters for CBS played up the 150 deaths (as of Sept. 9)--less than half actual combat casualties--of Americans occupying a country of 23 million. But in contrast, the program has never done a report on the massive murder count--the highest in the nation--that afflicted primarily the minority areas of Chicago in 2002, which saw 648 people killed out of two million residents. In that same time span of approximately 130 days, Chicago had about 230 murders, well over the 150 in Iraq. American deaths anywhere are a grave concern, but to CBS some are more important to others.

We've provided the headline and date for every story about news from Iraq run on the CBS Evening News during the post-war period, with each labeled as either negative, positive, or neutral (neither good nor bad news). N.B.: This analysis is only of stories that relayed news from Iraq; stories about domestic or foreign disputes over rebuilding Iraq were excluded from the data set.

Looking at the Data

Graph: A dot represents the number of negative, positive, and neutral stories for the week. (Click for larger)

As portrayed in the graph, negative stories easily dominated positive stories throughout almost all the weeks studied.

July had the most positive reports with 12 as a result of news of the deaths of Saddam Hussein's two sons. The week of July 20 through July 26 was the only period in which positive outnumbered negative, helped by five Hussein stories in three days.

CBS Stories Correspond With Approval Ratings

On the issue of Iraq, the news media is essential to Americans since most of them do not have any other way of obtaining information about events in a country thousands of miles away from them. Thus, when the media report good news from the country, public support increases for Bush's handling of Iraq. Despite good or bad news, whether the administration is actually doing well or poorly is not determined by the week's poll numbers, nor by the latest news cycle.

The latter end of July was indeed rare in that all the media polls asking, "Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation in Iraq?" saw a rise in Bush's favor immediately after the news of the capture of Uday and Qusai Hussein. A Newsweek poll of Bush's postwar handling in Iraq found a five-percent jump from 53 percent support during a July 10-11 poll to 58 percent on July 24-25. The first news of the deaths of the Husseins occurred on July 22. This was CBS's highest month of positive stories from Iraq, most focused on the killing of the two sons.

Newsweek also asked, more specifically, "How well do you think U.S. efforts to establish security and rebuild Iraq have gone since major combat ended on May 1st?" After the news of the two deaths, there was a six-point jump in those who thought the U.S. had done well in providing security. On July 10-11 it was 51 percent; on July 24-25 it was 57 percent.

These numbers were temporary blips in an otherwise downward decline, driven by a rare few days of positive headlines in the media. In a poll a month later, Newsweek found the numbers right back where they started. On August 21-22, 54 percent approved of Bush's Iraq handling and 52 thought the security situation was going well.

The American people gave the president higher numbers immediately after the two deaths. This begs the question: Did Bush's skill at handling Iraq really improve in that one-week time period? Hardly, but two things did improve: people's perception of Bush and CBS's reporting parity. The CBS Evening News improved its positive-to-negative quotient, with 13 positive stories to 28 negative stories in July. In August, though, the disparity between positive and negative was large again: five positive stories to 40 negative. With lower approval numbers on Iraq the next month, did that mean Bush's skills had diminished after 30 days? No, but the number of positive stories had.

Illusory Iraqi Discontent

On May 22, Dan Rather introduced another story on the latest attack on American troops in Iraq: "As CBS's David Hawkins reports, it was a close call for the American soldiers involved."

Hawkins began his piece: "If the goal of the attackers was to kill U.S. soldiers, they failed. But if their purpose was to provoke an American reaction and further inflame tensions here, they've succeeded."

But the attackers achieved even more. Hawkins could have said, more accurately, "If their purpose was to get on the American evening news programs and create an illusion of chaos for the viewers, they've succeeded."

Indeed, it is an illusion. A poll conducted by Zogby and American Enterprise magazine of 600 Iraqis from across the country showed that, among other things, "two thirds of those with an opinion urged that the coalition troops should stick around for at least another year." This sentiment is in stark contrast to that of militants who want to drive America out of Iraq immediately, the small minority who attack (or say they do attack) U.S. troops and get their veiled faces on the CBS Evening News.

CBS helped preserve its illusion by refusing to run the Zogby-AEI poll, which contradicted much of their coverage. But months earlier, Dan Rather ran on June 3 a poll by "Pew Global Attitudes," a survey that, according to the anchor, "finds the war in Iraq has pushed support for the United States in Muslim countries to new lows." He also reported that according to the poll, "many Muslims rate Osama bin Laden at or near the top among world leaders." This conflicts with the survey he chose to black out, which revealed that "57 percent of Iraqis with an opinion have an unfavorable view of Osama bin Laden, with 41 percent of those saying it is a very unfavorable view."

Why the Fixation?

Reporters could be politically motivated, choosing to look only at the negative for the sake of influencing the public. Or there could be one or more explanations for their fixation on the negative. Karl Zinsmeister, editor in chief of American Enterprise magazine which partnered with Zogby International in researching the poll, gave another reason why he thinks CBS and the rest of the media are obsessing with bad news in Iraq and ignoring positive events. "10,000 schools being rehabbed isn't news; one school blowing up is a weeklong feeding frenzy."

One example of CBS shunning the yawn-inducing positive news about restoring Iraq is from a July 1 CBS Evening News report introduced by fill-in anchor John Roberts:

"It was another violent day on the streets of Iraq for U.S. troops and Iraqis alike. Six Americans were wounded in two ambush attacks, four Iraqi civilians were shot and killed in incidents at U.S. checkpoints and at least 10 died in a disputed explosion at a mosque."

Yet another day with pockets of resistance. After talking about the bad, Roberts was obliged to report what the U.S. head of civilian administration in Iraq had taken great pains to convey to the media earlier in the day.

"Despite all that, the chief U.S. administrator in Iraq insisted today that conditions there are steadily improving. CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer has more on the struggle to win the peace in Iraq, beginning with an ambush in the heart of Baghdad."

The report did indeed begin with the ambush in Baghdad. "In the most brazen attack, a crude bomb blew up a Humvee . . ." Palmer devoted 250 words to attacks and bombs, and then finally, with great skepticism, gave a sentence to good developments in Iraq. Cynically she reported that "the American authorities are busy telling anyone who will listen that they have put a million and a half Iraqis back to work and are restoring basic services." To her, though, there was even more important news that day: "But more hopeful still, the only soldiers visible in downtown Fallujah today were reading magazines in front of city hall."

Palmer did not find news in a million and a half Iraqis back to work--- although that same number out of work in the U.S. would most certainly get her and her colleagues' attention. She'd rather obsess over the 149 casualties and 60 combat deaths that have captured the imagination of journalists as well as Democrats hoping for an opening.

During a September 4 one-on-one interview with Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, Dan Rather asked him to give "one example of a success [in Iraq] that you think is being underreported." The general responded, "Sir, I could give you a hundred."

"I'm asking for one," Rather instructed.

Only one? We hope that CBS will choose to find others. print_file('footer'); ?>