OverSpill>

Ever since the war in Iraq began 6 days ago, it quickly got "supersized" and turned into the war of the "est": largest bombs, best troops, fastest ground moves, and widest media coverage.

The unprecedented media coverage of this war, both mainstream and "non" alike is mindblowing. News junkies in need of daily fix are able to get "all the news that bandwidth can hold" in matter of minutes after news become news.

Weblogs are a particular phenomenon:MSNBC yesterday did a great job summarizing the warblogging activity. Weblogs have been gaining attention in past year or so, with even some some news breaking accomplishments, e.g. Trent Lott.

Blogs provide a bold, daring and intelligent alternative to mainstream and will (if haven't already) soon redefine journalism. WarBlogs, either co-authored, multi-authored or a one man show draw a global, intelligent, politically savvy, sophisticated, thinking crowd. Chances are, if you Google for recent news, you'll hit the "blog" first. Originally created as online personal "journals", weblogs now sport a "forum"-like discussion environment and "expert analyses".

Qatar's Al-Jazeera, for example, has been making contraversial headlines this past weekend with its broadcast of American POWs' video. And even though American mainstream hasn't picked it up or refused to to show, bloggers have circulated the broadcast in either original or "transcripted" version.

Al-Jazeera, unsurprisingly, mostly targets European audience, because of a large Arab population there. Mostly anti-American and anti-Israel network, Al-Jazeera has been a mouthpiece for al-Qaeda and other terrorists groups.

With constant propaganda it "downloads" on its audience, is it any wonder that European and Arabic countries have this, this and this?

As CNN crew has been expelled from Baghdad, Europeans largely getting anti-US media coverage and Al-Jazeera being the only network allowed in Iraq in "the heart" of the action and broadcasting, the question that pops into my mind is this:

What are the costs of us winning the military campaign at the expense of losing a "PR" one? Or, alternatively, how much is "PR" image worth to us, given the fact we have a war to win? What about the fairest reporting?

Posted By Dima (Overspill) at March 25, 2003 08:34 PM | TrackBack