There have been a lot of excellent posts in this thread. I’ve got a lot to get off my chest.
I think a lot of the points raised here go beyond the issue of Cpl Boneca's death, to the larger and ongoing relationship between the CF, the media, the government, and the public.
I find this relationship a fragile one, and it is sometimes hard to keep cool judgement, because for most of us on this board we are either in, returning from, or going into harm's way, and if not us, close friends and family.
But the relationship is an important one, a vital one, yet many Canadians don’t appreciate the damage that could be visited upon our society if that relationship were to break down.
I agree with Teddy Ruxpin's assessment of how many members of the media operate. There are still some ethical reporters out there, but they are fighting a system that often favours the unscrupulous.
Tony Keene, I see you have put thought into your arguments, but I disagree with much of what you say.
It think we are fighting at least five ‘sins of the media’: sensationalism, inaccuracy, politicization, anti-authoritarianism, and disinformation. These are separate but intertwined.
SENSATIONALISM - I don't agree with reporters approaching families of the deceased immediately, whether or not, as Tony Keene suggests, those families support us or not. This doesn’t apply only to us – civilian victims of crime and accident usually receive the same treatment.
They are approached when the grief and shock is at its height, because in my opinion, that is when they are most likely to say something ‘interesting’ – i.e. sensational. Emotions are high such as anger, grief, regret, guilt, and many people in those situations will lash out at something, anything, to make sense of it all.
Chances are in two months, even if those victims continue to hold the same opinions, they will be expressed in a less dramatic fashion, so they hold less ‘pizazz’. The story will have retained its substance, but lost its excitement. To the back page the story goes, or more likely to oblivion. Any long-term pain visited upon the family by insensitive reporting is ‘collateral damage.’
Dignity is what separates news from infotainment, and I feel as a society we are losing that battle.
Was there ever a time when there was respect for the family of the dead? Am I dreaming? Was there ever a time when people looked at the family of a slain soldier or police officer and said, “Allow them to grieve, they owe us nothing more, how can we help them?”
Isn’t it ironic that at a time when the public should be rushing to help the family, or at the very least leaving them alone, that they are obliged to issue statements to defend their dignity?
When did this change? Is this the new norm?
INACCURACY – Picking up the phone and checking facts has become more of a ‘luxury’ in the age of 24 hour news. Wire services and electronic media think in terms of minutes, not hours, and if they can get the punchier 50% accurate headline out today, it often trumps the 100% accurate headline tomorrow.
Using this last ‘Reservist misled’ fiasco as an example, did they talk to a single reservist currently on ops, or for that matter, who has EVER gone on ops, and asked such questions as, “The regulars do the combat, but reservists do the peacekeeping, right?” Or “They just called you up and sent you into combat, right?”
In a five minute conversation, any reservist I know who has been overseas would set them straight. That’s lazy, sloppy reporting, nothing less.
The media are far more careful about this when dealing with big business, because big business sues or yanks/threatens to yank sponsorship when they get a raw deal.
Because the CF play fair, we are an easy target, along with police, government, etc.
If you are going to hang us for incompetence, (and that is a legitimate role of the media) at least do us the decency of getting the facts straight.
POLITICIZATION – This one is the real killer. This is just my opinion, but it is the one that I think can do us the most harm. It is fairly easy to see that many media outlets in this country, and most newspapers, have an identifiable political slant.
The Toronto Star is quite ‘left’, The National Post is quite ‘right’ and on and on.
Often, (again just my opinion) these papers directly or indirectly stump for their favourite political party.
Here’s the danger: in the May 17 Parliamentary debate on the extension of the mission, on that date the war became, in my opinion, a partisan political issue.
This may be a simplistic analysis, but after that debate, to me the lines have been drawn in the mind of the public:
Harper and the Conservatives became ‘pro-war’ a la Bush.
The NDP and the Bloc became ‘anti-war.’ (You may say they were always that way, but they were awfully quiet about it when Martin was PM).
The Liberals became, in their magic way, all things to all people: mainly anti-war, but kind of a little bit pro-war, in a ‘we’ll see if Harper doesn’t botch it then it was our idea after all’ way.
The result for the soldiers on the ground is not a good one.
What I feel is that a successful military outcome in Afghanistan has been subtly tied to the Conservatives, and conversely, a military failure has been tied to the NDs and BQ, and a mildly successful but mostly screwed up outcome is great for the Liberals.
Does that hurt to say? It hurts me like hell. But IMHO that is our political reality.
So while our soldiers and their loved ones go through physical and mental hell for a cause they are willing to die for, many of our politicians and their media backers are (again just my peasant opinion) crossing their fingers that it all goes wrong.
And THAT is why, Mr. Keene, soldiers can smell the sharks in the media, just WAITING for us, hands rubbing in glee, to screw something up.
Will me make a mistake? Oh, you can count on it. It’s inevitable – thousands of troops in a volatile situation – things will go wrong. And when the facts of our mistakes DO check out, you are going to see some media outlets let rip on our soldiers with a viciousness that the Taliban would admire.
ANTI-AUTHORITARIANISM – Connected to politics, but not always. There are some folks in our media who just love tearing down cops and soldiers. Remember post-Somalia? It was open season – not just on torture, murder, cover-up, and other things worth looking into. Hell no, I remember reading prominent stories about soldiers ‘arrested for impaired driving’ implying that the CF were rife with criminals, or who can forget the national shame that ‘soldiers in Yugo had sex with nurses.’ SEX! With NURSES!
It got bloody ridiculous.
Have the media been kind to us since 9-11? Often yes. You bet. Often they’ve been great. Locally, we have had soldiers arrested for drug dealing, kiddie porn, domestic violence, etc. and they are handled in the media with attention that I would consider ‘fair’. Facts are brought out and presented, visibly but not hysterically, and then the world moves on.
I have no problem with the media reporting our mistakes and missteps, but just like schoolyard teasing, with certain reporters/outlets you can tell when there’s spite behind a remark.
And again, call me old-fashioned, but when there’s a war, and you ask troops to go and fight and die, doesn’t society owe them a pat on the back? A bit of respect?
Do we have to beg for it, CONSTANTLY?
I remember the NDP MP Paul Dewar saying he wouldn’t get caught up in “jingoistic ballyhoo” during the debate. It’s a common Canadian sentiment that you are ‘right wing’ if you go so far as to put a yellow ribbon magnet on your car or shake a soldier’s hand.
It’s the old story – people call cops ‘pigs’ but trip over themselves calling 911 when someone breaks into their home.
It’s an old argument, not new. Oh, I also remember going off to ‘blue beret peacekeep’ and being called warmonger and all that other garbage, which most of us here old enough to remember will probably back up.
With many Canadians you can’t win. I could take it before. But with every casualty we take, I find cutting remarks like ‘imperialist fascist warmonger’ harder and harder to take.
Throat punching is wrong. We serve the public. But the covenant between military and public is a two way street, and you don’t ask people to die and then throw them away.
I appreciate those who hold diverse arguments in a democracy. I stand for the right for people to hold that opinion. But after 20 years of explaining over and over again to people who are often shockingly uninformed (not of DIFFERENT opinion, but of FACTUALLY WRONG opinion) I have concluded that many ‘debaters’ don’t give a hoot for world politics, they just get a charge out of snotting off to someone in authority.
DISINFORMATION The enemy is out there. The 911 conspiracy theorists would tell you otherwise, but terrorists do exist. They are not stupid. They are watching us and loving our internal dissent, because it is their best, if not only chance for victory in Afghanistan. There is a strong possibility they are visiting this forum, just as an aside.
In the 1980s, if you talked of Soviet plans to blanket Western Europe with nukes and chemicals, or that they had sleeper cells in the West, you were often laughed off as a paranoid Joe McCarthy.
The Wall came down, the records were opened, and lo and behold, the fears were real. Proved.
Ever hear that admitted by the military-bashers of that era? I haven’t.
Also documented post-Cold War were robust Soviet efforts to manipulate our media and public opinion.
One can only assume it is being done now. Everytime I see the media dutifully reporting the plight of a doe-eyed gentleman fingered by CSIS as a terrorist, who has “Absolutely no idea why he has been detained,” I shake my head.
“Free Press” and “Right to Know” are vital to a democracy. They guard democracy.
But, as the old saying goes, who guards the guards?
If the press is content to bash the CF for all the wrong reasons, they can damage us.
It can creep into our national psyche.
I feel empathy bordering on rage when I think of the hundreds of soldiers that will return soon.
They will have seen friends die. They will bear wounds of body and mind that may never heal.
And they will come back to a half-interested public that is often ungrateful, childish, spiteful, capricious, and a media who feeds their whims.
I don’t know what can be done. Even in World War II we had riots in this country against conscription while thousands were killed overseas, so anti-military petulance is part of our makeup I suppose. I don’t expect legions of people scattering flowers at our feet. I don’t expect people who feel the war is wrong to change their mind.
But there is something sick and wrong about the subtle abuse hurled at our soldiers by yellow journalism
Maybe it’s just another thing we have to deal with, like IEDs, bad weather, PTSD, sandflies, etc.
Sorry for the long rant.
Hollywood, just read your post: outstanding.
