Skip to main content

Media jumps on “low recruitment rate” of Army, other services

This week we have heard that the Armed Services are missing their recruitment quotas. However, one point missed in nearly every article I have read misses one important point:

“How has the reporting of the press played a part in lowering recruiting?”

If I can be blunt I don’t think I would be stretching it to say that the press’s reporting on the War in Iraq and Afghanistan has been a little negative. In fact I have really tried to find stories that paint a positive side to what is going on over there with our men and women, but they are hard to find

To be fair there is a lot of bad stuff happening there. Car bombs going off just about every day. Soldiers dying every day. Yet if there was some balance placed into some of the reporting, the ratio of causality to soldiers deployed is fractional compared to other armed conflicts. In fact people are dying on our nation’s highways at a much higher rate than in Iraq. Seriously, we have over 100,000 troops there. To lose one is bad, but realistically, being a 13 year Army Veteran I’ll tell you this: To lose two or three a day on a war of this scale is incredible success.

Kids back home read the paper, look at the news and see “bad, bad, and more bad”. Most of this simply because by and large the MSM is biased against the war and doesn’t want to say anything good about it. Flash back to Vietnam and look at the reports back then and you have pretty much the same picture being painted by MSM on a daily basis. It’s as if they put up a banner: “We’re losing the war, don’t come here – you’ll get killed!”

No, the MSM shouldn't be a cheerleader for the military – but it had better take the responsibility to be BALANCED and UNBIASED in it’s reporting about the war. As with Mr. Isikoff at Newsweek and his 'hackery', the cost can be great. My word to him:

“Bud, if you have an axe to grind against our men and women, take it to France! You are a disgrace to America”.

But “hacks” aside, the MSM is losing credibility and if they ever want to see their “glory” days return they had better get back to Journalism 101 – “Report the news; be fair and balanced; tell the truth.”


Joe said…
They are what they are -- they're a company selling a product.

The military, too, is selling a product, in a way -- they want you to decide that the benefits of joining the military outweigh the costs.

It's natural, and they're just two of many options competing in a vast marketplace for people's time and energy.

If people don't like news reporting, they're welcome to turn elsewhere (Many are - look at Fox News' viewership numbers). This isn't the Soviet Union, and the MSM ain't Pravda.

Which is why your attempt to downplay the significance of the Army not meeting its recruiting goals makes no sense. The fact that a negative portrayal of the war in the media lowers recruiting makes no difference -- they have no responsibility to boost recruitment, as it's not their job.

The army is selling a job that they want people to accept -- that's the whole idea with having a volunteer army, as opposed to a draft (Every military study has shown that a volunteer army is more effective).

If people aren't volunteering, perhaps the Army should offer them significantly more money. More people will consider military service if it pays six figures.

Would that cost significantly more money? It would.

Since the military is providing services to the country, perhaps taxes should be raised to pay for that.

The lesson here: If you're going to fight a war, don't fight it on the cheap.
MacRanger said…
I would agree that the Army (of which I am retired from); should do more to make it more attractive. But there is a history of connection between the media and recruitment.

For example in both WWI and WWII the media was instrumental in "pumping up patriotism" and motivating a nation to serve. This began to wane in Korea and was nearly non-existant during Vietnam.

Initially, 9/11 fostered the "go get 'em" that fueled recruitment - but again, becuase of the now mostly negative reporting of the MSM it IS having an affect.

There ARE very positive things taking place in Iraq and believe it or not our victories far outweigh our defeats. We are making a difference.

Yet even after WWII some of the same negativity that came out during our occupations of Germany and Japan, are similiar to what we see today.

In the end I believe you are right in saying that "The Army should do more", because they are definitely in a PR battle with the left of the MSM.

Popular posts from this blog

Calling Mr. Fitzgerald?


As I told you about in this post yesterday as a source confirmed to me that the Justice Department has launched a probe into the NSA leak. Mr. Risen, you are in trouble - prepare your defense. I told you so.

The White House will be announcing the probe at about 12:30pm. My source tells me that this probe will most likely result in another prosecutor being assigned as of course Fitzgerald is still busy/dizzy on the Plame/Game No-Leak. Additionally, other probes into other recent leaks such as the CIA 'prisons'leak is in the works as well. As I said, this is the NEW Bush - on the attack - it's no more Mr. Nice Guy!

About time! Also covering Michelle Malkin

*****End Update*********

UPDATE II: Looks like I owe my source big time as yet another tip comes true as the Washington Post is on the target list as well for the CIA Prison leak.

****End Update II*************************************

Update III: Via Fox: "The government has no legal right to…

Able Danger - Sign Up - Get the Truth

Per the Able Danger Blog (newly added link), get over to this petition and sign ur name. Again, if there is any chance of true bi-partisan hearings, the people are going to have to speak up and loud.

Just do it!

Newsbusters Busts the MSM on Bush Event

Newsbusters, the blog of Brent Bozell's Media Research Center, exposes the MSM attempt to spin President Bush's meeting with troops into a 'staged event'.

Truth is that the event was not staged, the troops were telling their real feelings: that they support the war and our President.

I guess they might have this story mixed up with the "planted question" to Sec. Rumsfeld back in December 2004.

Yet, that wasn't the case here, Soldiers when asked, will tell you the truth.

Just like in this picture, they tell it like it is!

Michelle Malkin has links to other reactions. Also Blogs for Bush.

UPDATE I: Michelle has a further reponse from one of the soldiers in the video. Here's an excerpt:

"First of all, we were told that we would be speaking with the President of the United States, our Commander-in-Chief, President Bush, so I believe that it would have been totally irresponsible for us NOT to prepare some ideas, facts or comments that we wanted to share …