 |
06/05/07
AP Press Release
AP journalists dissect coverage of
the Iraq war for 'Breaking News' panel discussion
NEW YORK -- Three veteran Associated Press journalists joined
AP President and CEO Tom Curley June 4 in analyzing the Iraq
war on the ground, in the political arena and from a historical
perspective.
“Fighting for the News: From the Battlefield and on
the Homefront” was the title of their discussion, moderated
by Curley at a Manhattan hotel before members and guests of
the Foreign Press Center.
Monday's event was timed to the release of a new history of
the AP, Breaking News: How the Associated Press Has Covered
War, Peace, and Everything Else, written by a team of
former and current reporters of the cooperative and published
by Princeton Architectural Press.
Baghdad-based Steven R. Hurst, AP’s Iraq Chief of Bureau,
who flew to New York for the gathering, said: “It’s
hard to give a very positive report of what’s going
on in Baghdad right now for a number of reasons. I think,
first and foremost, the United States puts a great deal of
hope that the so-called troop surge would start having an
effect. Immediately after it was announced, there was a significant
drop in violence, in February and March, but that lasted a
very short time. Now, we’ve seen a number of people
being killed there, which is sadly the Baghdad story right
now.”
Hurst added, “The death toll among Americans, of course,
while very small compared to that of the Iraqis who have been
suffering through this, is increasing. It’s very bad
news for the surge, because I’m wondering what it’s
going to do politically inside the United States in terms
of maintaining that surge, whether you agree with it or not.”
New York-based Senior Deputy International Editor Steven Komarow,
who recently spent time with Hurst in Baghdad, also focused
on the attention being paid to the troop surge, saying it’s
clear that “the American public has bought into the
surge as a turning point in this war. I think it weighs heavily
on folks who are there [in Iraq] and also folks back at the
Pentagon in Washington and clearly the political class, as
well. So this has been a huge challenge for us in reporting
the story. Steve [Hurst] and his folks are working hard and
risking their lives to get details of what is actually going
on on the ground and that’s the center of an entire
universe of stories we coordinate here in New York.”
Komarow added: “One has to wonder, if the surge does
not work out, then what happens next? How does the American
public sort through that?”
Curley observed, “It seems to me that the [presidential]
candidates in the election are doing their best to play dodgeball
over Iraq.”
Washington-based enterprise reporter Nancy Benac agreed and
added, “We do a series on the candidates called ‘On
the Issues’ … It’s a moving target. You
can’t just say where they stand on Iraq and be done
with it, because check back a week later, and they’ve
changed.”
“It’s not clear that the United States has the
political will to stay with this much longer,” Curley
said, before asking the panelists what happens next.
Hurst responded: “I hope that what happens next doesn’t
happen until after there is a long period of examination of
the ethical question that needs to be answered, and, that
is, there is a situation in Iraq today -- leave aside how
it got that way -- for which the United States bears some,
if not a lot of responsibility. My guess -- and, I think,
it’s a guess, perhaps a prediction, held by a lot of
people who are more expert than me -- is that when the United
States goes, if it goes too quickly from Iraq, that there
will be a great deal of killing and a lot of bloodshed.”
Hurst added: “I think clearly, though, that when the
United States begins to leave, if there hasn’t been
some sort of miraculous turnaround there -- there’s
no sign of that -- that there is going to be a lot of violence.
A lot of violence. You’ll probably end up with a much
more radical style Shiite-led government in at least part
of Iraq, if it isn’t partitioned completely …
It’s probably an outcome that had the American public
known about, going into it, there would have been a lot less
fervor and support for the war.”
During the question-and-answer session, when a member of the
audience inquired about the AP’s operation in Baghdad,
Curley replied, “We’re not going to discuss the
absolute specifics of our security but we are located two
buildings from The New York Times. We’re all in the
same compound. We have similar security around ourselves.
We also have additional joy in that the road outside our compound
is about to be reopened. It’s been closed. It turns
out that we all are living in what was Baghdad’s SoHo
back in the day, and it was the part of Baghdad where Saddam’s,
some of the elite ministers and family members lived. So it
was a desirable area and there was a lot of street life. The
government wants to reopen that area. So we are reinforcing
security in that area.”
“AP has lost six people in the coverage of Iraq,”
Curley added.
Referring to AP photographer Bilal Hussein, he noted, “We
have one held by the U.S. military without being charged.”
“As far as the organizations over there, we have, I’m
sure, the most people,” Curley said. “A number
of our people have been tailed and singled out and assassinated.
And you almost never know all the circumstances that led to
the killings.”
Curley said, “Getting the story is obviously much more
complicated and we are always frustrated by the limits.”
Hurst said: “There’s been a lot of sometimes muted,
sometimes not so muted criticism of the coverage of the war
because of the necessary ability of the people to get out
and look at it as much as in past wars, simply because of
the fact that we’ve become targets, like we have bull’s
eyes painted on our foreheads … I don’t look like
an Iraqi. I can’t hide that.”
At the same time, Hurst said, he felt “great gratification”
when AP’s monthly tally of the killings in Iraq during
May, “collected independently through our network of
stringers and reporters,” was close to the total released
by the Iraqi government.
As Hurst put it, “I think it does show that we can’t
see everything, we can’t smell the story as we should,
we can’t taste it as we should, we can’t get out
and get all of the emotion that we should be getting because
we simply can’t. But in terms of measurement, I think
we’re doing a pretty good job.”
“Getting the story is a process that takes time,”
Curley said. “I think this story has moved a lot faster
than the Vietnam War story, for better or worse.”
Curley added: “In Vietnam, it took three days for the
video and many of the photographs to become public. Some photographs
did get out sooner than that but a lot had to be shipped to
process. Obviously, now, all the news organizations have spent
tens of millions of dollars to get instant reporting from
the battlefield. What is different is that the journalists
in Vietnam had almost instant access and they weren’t
required to be embedded in a certain way. They’d just
show up at a place and hop on a helicopter and fly to a battle
and fly back and go where they needed to go. That access has
long since passed. But in terms of the Internet leveling the
playing field, in terms of certain aspects of the technology,
it surely has [changed], but we don’t have the access
to what’s going on in the field that we had back then.
There’s no question about that.
“Our bureau was open and still functioning when the
North Vietnamese came in when they got to Saigon [in 1975].
They shared some stale pound cake and Coca-Cola in that bureau
before the circuits were cut. We don’t think that would
happen in these circumstances.”
ABOUT THE AP
The Associated Press is the essential global news network,
delivering fast, unbiased news from every corner of the world
to all media platforms and formats. Founded in 1846, AP today
is the largest and most trusted source of independent news
and information. On any given day, more than half the world's
population sees news from AP.
On the Net: www.ap.org
Contact: Jack Stokes, AP Corporate Communications, 212.621.1720
|
