Kurtz: Fair to ask if media skepticism is behind declining support for war

[BurtWorm]

In his online forum at the WaPo, Kurtz was just asked by a poster:


Louisville, Ky.: Howard,

I'm not sure why you would take up the "media doesn't report the good stories" meme, as you have on CNN recently. Considering that 80 journalists have died in Iraq and that no one can go anywhere without armed transport, it's pretty obvious that the bad news in Iraq heavily outweighs the good news. I'm all for diversity of opinion, but hard news should strive to report facts and not please all audiences.

Do you agree?

Howard Kurtz: I don't adopt the "meme," as you put it, I raise questions about it. Clearly the security situation, as I have written many times, makes it difficult for the courageous journalists there to move around and talk to ordinary Iraqis. And it may be that the violence has gotten so bad in recent months that that is the overwhelming reality of life in that country. But I also think it's fair to question whether declining public support for the war, and the journalists' own views, have played a role. If the media coverage in fact is turning sharply more skeptical, and in some cases hostile, that could have a major impact on the country as it did during the Vietnam War.




My question to him:


You wonder whether it's fair to ask if media reports are turning public opinion in the US against the war? Don't you want to know first if the reports are accurate? Isn't that a more important question? Do the media really need to concern themselves with what role they play in the administration's poll numbers?