"They have taken every opportunity to blow setbacks and rumoured losses out of proportion to make the US look bad.
I don't agree with you on that one. As a matter of fact, Dutch TV
didn't seem at all interested in this war until 7 days ago. They were all too occupied with the 'Princess Margarita' thing.
Now that they finally do inform about the war, I believe they do so in a correct manner and do not at all base their statements on rumours. When they inform of anything which they can't check for themselves, one of the basic principles of journalism, they do state so. That is the main reason why Wouter Kurpershoek (Dutch TV
journalist mentioned in first post) decided not to work any longer as an 'embedded journalist' as the information he was provided with could not be checked by either himselve or other independent sources.
"You are aware of the fact that the US/UK Military invited all sorts of Foreign reporters (even from Arab tv) to ride along with their front line units.
Only the embedded reporters get all kinds of facilities, like satellite uplinks to send their pictures and sound (either live or not) back to their home-bases, direct access to information provided by the military, some sort of security while 'on the road', etc.
"They didn't have to, they didn't in the Gulf War.
The allies didn't allow for any
media to be embedded with their forces, during the First Gulf War.
"Where else are foreign reporters offered such intimate contact with US and UK front line forces, they were fed and transported by coalition forces.
This is a first time in history that this has happened. Actually, there are more reporters working in the area independently, than there are embedded reporters.
"You guys are a little spoiled, seriously the mere fact that French, German, Arab, Dutch reporters are traveling with US and UK troops during this campaign is an unprecedented act of openess on the part of Coalition forces.
Its also in the interest of the Coalition Forces to have foreign reporters embedded with their troops. I'd even say that the Coalition Forces have more interest in having foreign reporters embedded, than having US or UK reporters.
"Your really missing the point, no where in history has such a campaign been so closely covered from so many view points.
Yes, and no. These embedded reporters do have limitations, as described above. These limitations were apparently too strict for Dutch TV
and others, that they decided not to go 'embedded'.
Now I know it is really nice to have a webcam placed on a tank and we can all see them driving through a Iraqi dessert while the reporter tells us they haven't found any resistance, but as long as the information cannot be verified, there is not much value in the information provided.
"If your riding along with troops who are risking there lives are you going to report crap about how the war might not be going to somebody's plan?
Well, believe it or not but its the job of a reporter
to report on what is happening, wether they like it or not.