 |
 |
   Washingtons budget hawks want to decimate the federal workforce to shrink the deficit. It will have the opposite effect.
 Last year there wasn�t a single fatal airline accident in the developed world. So why is the U.S. health care system still accidently killing hundreds of thousands? The answer is a lack of transparency.
 Dan Savage, the brilliant and foul-mouthed sex columnist, has become one of the most important ethicists in America. Are we screwed?
 There arent nearly enough counterterrorism experts to instruct all of Americas police. So we got these guys instead.
|
   |
|
|
May 21, 2005
By:
In the eight newspapers and magazines they surveyed during a six-month period of heavy fighting, there was only one picture of a dead American soldier (a photo of a covered body printed by the Seattle Times). On average, the newspapers printed a picture of a wounded soldier approximately once a month. The Iraqi side was quite different: all the newspapers and magazines printed large numbers of photos of Iraqi dead and wounded. The editors interviewed for the story said that access was one reason for the disparity: there aren't that many photographers in Iraq and it's unusual for one to be around when an American unit is attacked. But they also made it clear that public reaction was intensely negative on the occasions when they did print pictures of dead or wounded U.S. soldiers. What to think? In the end, the stats are provocative but not really conclusive. The newspapers all published lots of photos of grieving soldiers as well as photos of carnage among Iraqis, which probably conveys the reality of war pretty adequately. The only real surprise, I thought, was the small number of photos of any kind published by the weekly newsmagazines, which are much more dependent on graphic content than newspapers. Counting all types of death-related photos of both Iraqis and Americans, Time published one photo every other issue and Newsweek published one photo every fourth issue. That's surprisingly sparse coverage. UPDATE: APME conducted a survey of editors and readers on the subject of graphic photos a few months ago, and Ryan Pitts summarizes the results here. Nickel version: In all cases, editors were more likely to think disturbing photos should be published than readers were, but only by a small margin. Ryan includes links to the original survey in his post. —Kevin Drum 12:03 PM Permalink | Trackbacks
Comments
May 2011
April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 |
|
|
    |
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
||||||
buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly |
||||||
