While the US TV people are all tied up in describing the "new technology" that is at work, I have to laugh at the recon/intel photos to which they are given access. Much of it appears distant and very indistinct, certainly not state-of-the-art, though the reporters and anchors don't seem to know this. I am certain the actual photos and radar/IR imagery that are being used are sharp as a tack and very detailed.
I also have to laugh at statements made by the media like, "It is thought that there are numerous tanks in such-and-such a town and the advancing troops have to be on the lookout for them." They come across like its all so suspenseful, like someone is going to ask for the movie rights. Excuse me, but statements like "Command leaders suspect" and "It is believed that..." "Resistance much greater than expected" are not in keeping with the J-Stars age. I suspect the US/UK military know exactly where every Iraqi tank and armored vehicle (and aircraft) is located at all times.
And how about the video imagery were are seeing? Has anyone seen an attack sequence filmed from a carrier plane? Anyone seen a strike package filmed from an aircraft? I have seen none of this myself, and I've been looking. Often, the network anchor is rattling on while a short fuzzy loop keeps playing over and over on part of the screen. Is this the best we can accomplish with new technology? Hardly. Then there is the confusing night vision footage. Same tape loop over and over-a tiny fraction of the war as seen through green phosphors. Pretty useless as information.
Your opinions on the imagery quality and the use of same by the media?