From: Walz, Robert Mr CGSC Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 8:12 AM To: Kerrick, Stephen W Mr CGSC CAL

Subject: FW: [NSRT] Editor's Ponder How to Present Broad View of Iraq (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE From one of my students. Good insight From: Scott Sonsalla [mailto:sonsallas@earthlink.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 9:07 PM To: bob.walz@us.army.mil Subject: FW: [NSRT] Editor's Ponder How to Present Broad View of Iraq Bob, one more thought on embeds below is an email from Sean Naylor, author of Not a Good Day to Die and a current writer for the Army Times Publishing Company. Pretty much lends first hand confirmation to what we talked about in class, but is a little more recent than the articles we had for reading. MAJ S From: NSRT@yahoogroups.com [mailto:NSRT@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of seanscribe@aol.com Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 10:20 AM To: NSRT@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [NSRT] Editor's Ponder How to Present Broad View of Iraq In a message dated 8/15/2005 10:22:14 AM Eastern Standard Time, Zoolatana@aol.com writes: Is the limited number of embeds (now) a function of US Military restrictions on the number allowed, or a function of how many the media organizations send out there and seek to have embedded? If there was a *need* for 700 embeds *then* is there a need for only three dozen now? Are the stakes that much lower now than back then? Is the people's right to know any less important now than it was then, or media organizations' (self-decribed) obligation to honor and uphold that *right* of the people to know, any less important now than it was then? Is what goes on in Iraq now really 19 point 44 (19.44) times less important now (number arrived at by putting 700 on the top and 36 on the bottom for a comparative process known as grunt analysis)?? Does the US command in Iraq actually confine press corps members to the fifth floor of the Palestine Hotel, or do they *spend most of their time* at that location for reasons other than having their movements officially restricted by the US command authorities? Higinbotham Let me see if I can attempt a few answers here. First, on what explains the limited number of embeds. Here at the Army Times Publishing Company we use embeds as our only way of reporting from Iraq. No-one

from our company is reporting out of hotels in Baghdad. One of our reporters, Matt Cox, was lightly wounded by shrapnel two weeks ago by a car bomb that exploded 25 feet from him. By his own admission, he's very lucky to be alive. Another staffer was knocked unconscious a few months ago by a car bomb that hit the Stryker in which he was riding. And Gina Cavallaro was on foot patrol in Ramadi March 20 when the soldier directly behind her was shot by a sniper - she held him in her arms as his life ebbed away. So we are not giving short shrift to the need to cover Iraq, nor do we suffer from any "bunker mentality." However, we have found that unlike the initial invasion of Iraq, when units were under orders to embed reporters, the degree to which requests to embed are welcomed now varies greatly from unit to unit. Some units are happy to have us for as long as we want to stay with them; others are only willing to tolerate a short embed, while other major units flat out reject embed requests. This dynamic is not limited to Iraq. My bosses wanted me to go to Afghanistan this month for a month-long embed. I tried to embed with three different organizations. Two requests were flatly refused, and the PAO for the third told me he could only embed me for a week at most. Result: my bosses decided to postpone the trip, as it just want worth the money to fly a reporter and a photographer half way round the world for a few days in the field. Of course the U.S. military doesn't confine reporters to their hotels. However, the failure to establish anything approaching a secure environment in Iraq, combined with the fact that Western reporters are now specifically targeted by terrorists/insurgents/criminal gangs, means that reporters who want to cover what is going in Iraqi society (very difficult to do from an embed position) must take their lives in their hands every time they drive out of their compound. My own news organization now requires every reporter going to Iraq, Afghanistan or any other war zone to go through an expensive, week-long "hostile environment" training course taught by ex-Royal Marine commandoes. Believe me, it only takes one "pretend" kidnapping - complete with executions, etc. - to focus your mind on the dangers faced every day in places like Iraq. The reporters who are taking those risks deserve gratitude, not scorn. Sean Naylor SPONSORED LINKS National security International security Round table Politics Government American politics YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "NSRT" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: NSRT-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE