Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 80

Thread: Public clueless about U.S. death toll in Iraq

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,123
    Post Thanks / Like

    Public clueless about U.S. death toll in Iraq

    Yet more evidence that the media isn't inherently "anti-Bush" nor "liberally biased" at all... and is, in fact, quite complicit:


    [SIZE="4"][B]Public, media losing sight of Iraq, study finds[/B][/SIZE]

    [I][SIZE="3"]Only 28 percent know that nearly 4,000 U.S. troops have been killed[/SIZE][/I]

    [URL="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23602987/"][COLOR="Blue"]...[/COLOR][/URL]

    Twenty-eight percent of the public is aware that nearly 4,000 U.S. personnel have died in Iraq over the past five years, while nearly half thinks the death tally is 3,000 or fewer and 23 percent think it is higher, according to an opinion survey released yesterday.

    The survey, by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, found that public awareness of developments in the Iraq war has dropped precipitously since last summer, as the news media have paid less attention to the conflict. [B]In earlier surveys, about half of those asked about the death tally responded correctly.[/B]

    Related Pew surveys have found that the number of news stories devoted to the war has sharply declined this year, along with professed public interest. "[B]Coverage of the war has been virtually absent[/B]," said Pew survey research director Scott Keeter, totaling about 1 percent of the news hole between Feb. 17 and 23.

    <snippet>

    "We try not to make any causal statements about the relationship between the absence of news and what the public knows," Keeter said. "But there's certainly a correlation between the two. People are not seeing news about fatalities, and there isn't much in the news about the war, whether it be military action or even political discussion related to it."

    <snip>

    [B]All education levels in the recent survey were similarly uninformed,[/B] Keeter said. The Pew "Political Knowledge Update" was based on nationwide telephone interviews of 1,003 adults conducted Feb. 28 through March 2.

  2. #2
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Press_Coverage;2429815]Yet more evidence that the media isn't inherently "anti-Bush" nor "liberally biased" at all... and is, in fact, quite complicit:


    [SIZE="4"][B]Public, media losing sight of Iraq, study finds[/B][/SIZE]

    [I][SIZE="3"]Only 28 percent know that nearly 4,000 U.S. troops have been killed[/SIZE][/I]

    [URL="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23602987/"][COLOR="Blue"]...[/COLOR][/URL]

    Twenty-eight percent of the public is aware that nearly 4,000 U.S. personnel have died in Iraq over the past five years, while nearly half thinks the death tally is 3,000 or fewer and 23 percent think it is higher, according to an opinion survey released yesterday.

    The survey, by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, found that public awareness of developments in the Iraq war has dropped precipitously since last summer, as the news media have paid less attention to the conflict. [B]In earlier surveys, about half of those asked about the death tally responded correctly.[/B]

    Related Pew surveys have found that the number of news stories devoted to the war has sharply declined this year, along with professed public interest. "[B]Coverage of the war has been virtually absent[/B]," said Pew survey research director Scott Keeter, totaling about 1 percent of the news hole between Feb. 17 and 23.

    <snippet>

    "We try not to make any causal statements about the relationship between the absence of news and what the public knows," Keeter said. "But there's certainly a correlation between the two. People are not seeing news about fatalities, and there isn't much in the news about the war, whether it be military action or even political discussion related to it."

    <snip>

    [B]All education levels in the recent survey were similarly uninformed,[/B] Keeter said. The Pew "Political Knowledge Update" was based on nationwide telephone interviews of 1,003 adults conducted Feb. 28 through March 2.[/QUOTE]

    When the drum beat of war begins ALL of the media gets in line and plays follow the leader. NBC, for instance, leans left for the most part, but they knelt before their master leading up to the war (defense giant General Electric). CBS knew their role too, especially when they have military superiors on their board of directors (william cohen)

  3. #3
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,179
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2429826]When the drum beat of war begins ALL of the media gets in line and plays follow the leader. NBC, for instance, leans left for the most part, but they knelt before their master leading up to the war (defense giant General Electric). CBS knew their role too, especially when they have military superiors on their board of directors (william cohen)[/QUOTE]

    What was the NY Times excuse?

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;2429830]What was the NY Times excuse?[/QUOTE]

    They have no excuse.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,123
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;2429830]What was the NY Times excuse?[/QUOTE]

    For what, Judith Miller?

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,534
    Post Thanks / Like
    I think the reason there has been a drop off from the earlier surveys is the primary fight between obama and Clinton has basically monopolized the news cycle for your local and national evening news.

    You can also blame the American public for not being informed , this day and age you can find all the information you want on the internet.

    using a simple google search (just the first three pages)

    CNN reported when coalition death toll hit 4000.
    USA Today reported when US death toll passed 3000.
    CBS reported when US death toll passed 3500.

  7. #7
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    358
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blaming the media for the public not having a rough idea of the number of deaths in Iraq is ridiculous. 28% of the people knowing seems about right. One can poll the American public about some of the most basic facts that they should know (ex. What is the Dow Jones Industrial Average plus or minus 100 points?), and the number knowing would be about 28%.

    The war has actually gone better in the past year, and the attention has unfortunately shifted away. The election is also more interesting news, at least to some.

    Please keep the troops in mind, regardless of political orientation.

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    21,029
    Post Thanks / Like
    Conspiracy or disinterest?


    Boring..


    Just like after 9/11, nearly every car on the road had a flag of some sort on it. I said at the time that in 6 months you wouldn't see 1% of what you see now. I was only half right, I think it took about 3 months..

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    Has anyone ever considered the possibility that people don't obsess over death tolls as the single most important factor in the Iraq War or any war, especially at the historically low levels they have been in this war? I think you guys who think this is a big deal are being absolutely ridiculous. The media and many on the left act as if the current death toll is the single most important factor in judging the success or failure of any war and that everyone should be current up to the minute, at all times, without any context whatsoever. It'd be one thing if 50,000 had died and the public thought only 5,000 had, but you guys are splitting hairs when you act as if people thinking 3k when its really 4k is some BFD. There's no conspiracy here - it's simply that not everyone is a mouth-foaming anti-Iraq war zealot like you guys. And you don't like or acknowledge that, so you create conspiracies where there are none because people like you ENJOY the idea that there is some ruthless cabal running things because it excites you and makes you feel special for realizing it and figuring it all out and it feeds your egos to think of yourselves as more knowing than others, when the alternative (and true) reality is that life really isn't that exciting and you guys really aren't that special or insightful. Sorry, but that's the truth.

    Sure, most people are against the war, but not obsessing about it like you and the same media who ran front-page stories from 04 to 06 when things were going much worse than they are now have simply stopped talking about Iraq as much, since the news is generally better and the casualty rates have dropped. The public thinks it was a mistake, that it looks like its finally going a bit better and that the death toll, while each surely a tragedy that no one can minimize or discount, is simply at a relatively low and stable level, especially compared to other wars our country has fought.

    Some think its 3k, 4k or a bit higher. There is no story here whatsoever because this is all well within normal standard deviations, especially among a data set composed of lots of people who have difficulty pointing out China on a map or knowing when the war of 1812 was fought. My God, liberals are children. You guys really think you have some special, keen insight into the way the world works because you read Chomsky and buy organic. It's hilarious.
    Last edited by jets5ever; 03-13-2008 at 08:47 AM.

  10. #10
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;2429826]When the drum beat of war begins ALL of the media gets in line and plays follow the leader. NBC, for instance, leans left for the most part, but they knelt before their master leading up to the war (defense giant General Electric). CBS knew their role too, especially when they have military superiors on their board of directors (william cohen)[/QUOTE]

    :zzz::zzz::zzz::zzz:

  11. #11
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    8,031
    Post Thanks / Like
    Aside from the initial defeat of Sadaam's military forces, the coverage of the war in Iraq has been inversely proportional to the successes being fought for and won on the ground there. That's why you haven't heard much at all lately. For all its alleged media manipulation mastery :rolleyes:, the Bush administration is pathetically inept at publicizing the areas of incredible progress in Iraq.

    Thanks for bringing it up PC, and in 1,000 words or less.

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,179
    Post Thanks / Like
    World events for most Americans stops at the gas pump.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,123
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=jets5ever;2429912]Has anyone ever considered the possibility that people don't obsess over death tolls as the single most important factor in the Iraq War or any war, especially at the historically low levels they have been in this war? I think you guys who think this is a big deal are being absolutely ridiculous. The media and many on the left act as if the current death toll is the single most important factor in judging the success or failure of any war and that everyone should be current up to the minute, at all times, without any context whatsoever. It'd be one thing if 50,000 had died and the public thought only 5,000 had, but you guys are splitting hairs when you act as if people thinking 3k when its really 4k is some BFD. There's no conspiracy here - it's simply that not everyone is a mouth-foaming anti-Iraq war zealot like you guys. And you don't like or acknowledge that, so you create conspiracies where there are none because people like you ENJOY the idea that there is some ruthless cabal running things because it excites you and makes you feel special for realizing it and figuring it all out and it feeds your egos to think of yourselves as more knowing than others, when the alternative (and true) reality is that life really isn't that exciting and you guys really aren't that special or insightful. Sorry, but that's the truth.

    Sure, most people are against the war, but not obsessing about it like you and the same media who ran front-page stories from 04 to 06 when things were going much worse than they are now have simply stopped talking about Iraq as much, since the news is generally better and the casualty rates have dropped. The public thinks it was a mistake, that it looks like its finally going a bit better and that the death toll, while each surely a tragedy that no one can minimize or discount, is simply at a relatively low and stable level, especially compared to other wars our country has fought.

    Some think its 3k, 4k or a bit higher. There is no story here whatsoever because this is all well within normal standard deviations, especially among a data set composed of lots of people who have difficulty pointing out China on a map or knowing when the war of 1812 was fought. My God, liberals are children. You guys really think you have some special, keen insight into the way the world works because you read Chomsky and buy organic. It's hilarious.[/QUOTE]


    That is some of the best, most articulate spin I've ever experienced. What a ride. It had everything. Including even some thinly veiled "no one cares" sentiment, as well as a comparison of the death toll to the Dow Jones average! Hooray!

    But, who attempted to offer any "special, keen" insight in this thread besides you? I offered a story, displayed the media's failure regarding the avoidance of the biggest issue of the decade, and let you guys have at it.

    For the record, I don't read Chomsky, nor buy anything organic besides milk. But you keep right on designing that model.
    Last edited by Press_Coverage; 03-13-2008 at 09:02 AM.

  14. #14
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,481
    Post Thanks / Like
    Everything needs perspective

    US casualties in major wars

    American Revolutionary War ~25,000
    War of 1812 ~20,000
    Mexican-American War 13,283
    Civil War [B]625,000[/B]
    WWI 116,516
    WWII 405,399
    Korean War 36,516
    Vietnam War 58,151

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,123
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=SanAntonio_JetFan;2429957]Everything needs perspective

    US casualties in major wars

    American Revolutionary War ~25,000
    War of 1812 ~20,000
    Mexican-American War 13,283
    Civil War [B]625,000[/B]
    WWI 116,516
    WWII 405,399
    Korean War 36,516
    Vietnam War 58,151[/QUOTE]


    Iraq is not a war. It's an occupation.

    We also don't have the troop numbers we had in the other modern conflicts, so the ratio conveniently isn't taken into account, now is it?

  16. #16
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,481
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Press_Coverage;2429964]Iraq is not a war. It's an occupation.

    We also don't have the troop numbers we had in the other modern conflicts, so the ratio conveniently isn't taken into account, now is it?[/QUOTE]



    I agree. We probably need more troops in Iraq.


    But, with the small numbers of US troops that have been there, in a country with almost 28 milllion people, it's amazing there haven't been more casualties.

  17. #17
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=HDCentStOhio;2429913]:zzz::zzz:[/QUOTE]

    :zzz::zzz::zzz::zzz:

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,123
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=SanAntonio_JetFan;2429973]I agree. We probably need more troops in Iraq.


    But, with the small numbers of US troops that have been there, in a country with almost 28 milllion people, it's amazing there haven't been more casualties.[/QUOTE]

    Not really, considering major combat operations lasted 3 weeks, the Iraqis relatively cooperated for the first 12-24 months before the insurgency mounted, and U.S. forces largely pulled back to base the moment the Golden Mosque was blown up.

    Still a disaster of an endeavor, and completely unjustifiable compared to the other conflicts you listed.

  19. #19
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,481
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Press_Coverage;2429978]Still a disaster of an endeavor, and completely unjustifiable compared to the other conflicts you listed.[/QUOTE]


    It's perfectly valid to debate the merits of this conflict and how it has been handled/mishandled and I never offered my opinion on this. You automatically ASSUME that I'm FOR this conflict.

    I live in military city USA, pal, so I have a lot of friends that have actually been there, some with multiple tours.

  20. #20
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,534
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Press_Coverage;2429978]Not really, considering major combat operations lasted 3 weeks, the Iraqis relatively cooperated for the first 12-24 months before the insurgency mounted, and U.S. forces largely pulled back to base the moment the Golden Mosque was blown up.

    Still a disaster of an endeavor, and completely unjustifiable compared to the other conflicts you listed.[/QUOTE]

    i didnt realize this was a post to debate the meritss of the War in Iraq.

    I thought it was about the media and the ****ty job they are doing?

    oh wait it was but everybody dismissed your nonsense so now we can switch it to a debate about the war.

    Nothing like hijacking your own threads.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us