According to a couple of our MSM’s finest, if casualties go up in Iraq “that, by any definition, is news”. If casualties go down, though….well, that’s just “the beginning of a trend — and it’s not even sure that it is a trend yet” and besides, “[t]here is also an enormous dispute over how to count the numbers”.
And you know how those numbers are. They can just be so “tricky”!
Here you go, folks. Good news from Iraq causes reporters to be “skeptical” while bad news is unquestionably big news.
Is there any wonder why so many Americans think that there’s not been even a scrap of progress in Iraq, despite copious evidence that there is?
[...] The Sundries Shack: [...]
[...] You might recall that earlier this month,the Washington Post buried a story about lower US casualties in Iraq on Page A14. When the Post’s Howard Kurtz asked a couple reporters why that would be so when higher casualties are routinely front-page news, we were told that it really wasn’t a trend and who could trust the military’s numbers anyhow. [...]