"Rite for war dead is rarely attended; Media do not cover military transfers much" by Bryan Bender, Globe Staff | April 28, 2009
DOVER AIR FORCE BASE, Delaware - It was Marine Corporal William C. Comstock's final homecoming: His remains, secured in a flag-draped "transfer case" in the rear of the cargo plane, arrived on the nearly deserted runway.
The 21-year-old supply technician from Van Buren, Ark., who died in Iraq, was the eighth arrival of a fallen service member from Iraq or Afghanistan open to media coverage under the Obama administration's new policy that permits reporters to attend if the families approve - a policy carefully constructed after pressure from First Amendment advocates and the opposition of some veterans' groups.
But Comstock's arrival almost wasn't covered. A single reporter showed up Wednesday night, along with a photographer from the Associated Press. At the first arrival ceremony approved for coverage - on April 5 - 35 media outlets were on hand. Attendance has waned considerably since: The second one had 17 media representatives, according to the Air Force, and the last few have had a handful in total.
Colonel Robert Edmondson, commander of the Mortuary Affairs Operations Center, said in an interview. "We were surprised that there wasn't more of a huge outpouring."
The lack of interest, however, may say more about the nation than the media.
I don't know if I want to keep reading this....
After years in which the Bush administration worried that images of returning casualties would traumatize the public, the images from Dover have had little emotional impact.
"Putting pictures of dead soldiers on the front page doesn't sell newspapers," said Ralph Begleiter, a journalism professor at the University of Delaware who sued the Defense Department in 2005 to lift the ban on media coverage, which dated from the 1991 Persian Gulf War. "When war news comes on television the ratings go down. Is it any surprise that the media chooses not to publish these events?"
Gee, they SURE START 'EM EASY ENOUGH with their lies!!!
There are practical limitations to more robust media coverage. The cost-cutting media has limited resources, and the Air Force can usually provide less than a half-day's notice before a casualty arrives - making it difficult for all but nearby journalists and the national media a few hours' drive away in Washington or New York to make it.
Look at them make excuses for themselves and their s*** coverage and censorship of the wars.
This is OFFENSIVE to me, readers!! The elite stink press deserves my scorn!
Yet even the national networks have shown only modest interest; they have not established a rotation system, as they often do for other events, to ensure that at least one crew is on hand to record the somber homecomings.
Others see a more fundamental reason why there is less interest than some might have expected.
"The sting has gone out of the Iraq debate," said Peter D. Feaver, a former National Security Council aide to President George W. Bush....
Look at who they brought on as an "expert."
Yeah, the "sting" has gone out because the AMERICAN PEOPLE WANT OUT!!!!
But we are STILL THERE and Clinton says we ain't withdrawing according to the deal Bush cut. Hey, what's one more lie and broken promise, huh, 'murka? Have a heaping helping of false-flag terror attacks to keep you there. Die in the sands of Iraq, morons!
If you want to read more from there, go here, readers. I'm done with s*** MSM coverage that never cared about the troops. If they did, they wouldn't have told the damnable lies we all knew were lies at the time!
