Do what he say!

WSJ goes even further…charging for mobile content, too.  I’m in one of those moods and just could resist injecting some commentary by way of a visual:

Hypocritical Sensitivity?

For those that don’t know my background, I am a retired Marine Lieutenant Colonel, a veteran of multiple combat tours/wars and a strong supporter of the military family.  That support includes a hyper-awareness of the sacrifice the entire military family endures, particularly in instances of a military member being killed.  Unless you have struggled through the vastly emotional process of leading the affairs for a military funeral and have personally gone down on bended knee to hand a carefully and precisely folded American flag to the parents of a brave young American killed in action and look into their eyes as they search for answers, you have, at best, only minimal understanding of the sacrifices.  I’ve voluntarily fulfilled that duty many times and, in one instance, for a fallen Marine who I personally knew when he was in high school student and whose parents I knew very well on a personal basis.  Yes, that’s his grave (Section 61, site 8423, Arlington National Cemetery) and his former girlfriend in the photo.  The sanctity and utter respect surrounding every facet of those gut-wrenching stories deserves collective and profound respect.  I don’t care if you support the war, hate this administration, hate that administration, or just want to make your voice heard…it is nothing short of basic human decency to respect the sacrifice.

I know I’m way off my normal topic range, but there is a reason and it was brought about by two unrelated war events recently. I’ll warn you right now this is loaded with opinion and conviction.  Take it at face value, but please don’t be surprised if you think it too laudatory of military service or critical of media work in a combat zone.  Trust me – I never once needed a reporter or photographer to accomplish any of the missions I was assigned.

The first event was the dissemination of a photo by Julie Jacobson, an AP embed photographer (“sight-seer” in grunt talk).  The photo is of Lance Cpl. Joshua M. Bernard, USMC, moments after he had been mortally wounded by an RPG round in Afghanistan.  As someone who has been there and done that in uniform a few times, I’m only shocked at the total lack of respect displayed towards the wishes of LCpl Bernard’s family.  They specifically requested the photo not be published out of respect for their son.  The photo was published immediately after LCpl Bernard’s funeral with the quip-ish rationale of “journalistic duty.”  Heck, it went out on their automated feeds like it was a picture of some high school band at a Labor Day parade.  The AP didn’t violate any standing rules for embedded media in a U.S. combat zone, but they definitely decided to look down their nose at having compassion for a family grieving over the loss of their son.  I can deal with that…I’ve definitely seen a whole lot worse than one photograph, a disrespected fallen warrior and a family hurt by others’ professional gains from the situation.  I can live with the fact the photo is out in the wild now.  It is part of history, a glimpse at the pain of war, a snapshot into the sacrifice made by the young to fulfill the strategies of the older.  I get all that.  The sacrifice made by LCpl. Bernard is exactly why people like Julie Jacobson and the AP have such wide and unfettered freedoms.

So…on to the second event.  Stephen Farrell was recently freed in Afghanistan by British commandos after being captured by the Taliban.  There were a few thin and unconfirmed stories about this up through his rescue, but it has now been publicly acknowledged that the mainstream media collectively put a blackout on the situation out of fear of endangering the captives lives.  How convenient.  Let me explain something about the expectations one should have in a place like Afghanistan or Iraq.  A foreigner of any sort, uniform or not, is  fair game.  Oddly enough, I am glad on only one count this capture didn’t get the same media attention that would be given if a U.S. service member was captured.  It avoided making the rescue messier for the commandos.  Nothing else and nothing more.  Yep, the only bright spot I see in how it was handled by the media is that it quite possibly made things easier for the guys in uniform (who were, after all, the guys who had to go in after Farrell after he got in way over his head, do the real dirty work and pull this guy’s backside out).  Good for the Brits once again – it was always a joy to work with/near them and those  lads were spot on as usual with getting the job done.  As for Farrell getting out alive, that’s nice and all that, but it came at the cost of his interpreter and a commando.  I would very much like to assume Farrell will be making the effort to personally thank the commando’s family for their son’s service and for helping save his life.

I know these two events are not like comparing apples.  Underneath both events, though, is an element of concern and compassion – ignored in once instance and the driving force in another.  War is an ugly line of work.  Once you drill past the hyperbole, the rhetoric of politics and the superficial opinions of the inexperienced, it comes down to individuals in the most horrific circumstances.  Some find the courage at a young age to strap on the armor of a modern-day knight to do their country’s bidding, like LCpl. Bernard.  Some enter into that arena for sake of their civilian profession, like Stephen Farrell.  Either way, they are both in roughly the same situation of their own accord.  Each becomes a player in an event that warrant coverage.  Both DO NOT, however, receive the same handling.

Sorry, no big conclusion…I didn’t bury the headline down here.  As you might have figured out if you read this whole post, I am just a bit conflicted about these two events.  I’m not throwing the hypocrisy or double standard flag in the air.  Yet.  Hopefully the good folks at the Poynter Institute will take care of that as I have heard rumored.

Roll Tide for $10/month?

Image by smile4camera via Flickr

   I made a promise to myself to not spend anymore time lamenting the pay wall issue, but the Alabama Daily launching the the TideSportsExtra.com site makes me want to illustrate a point.  For $10 a month or $59.95 per year, you get “photos, blogs, video and extensive coverage, the site will offer an unparalleled fan experience.”  Somehow, the Alabama Daily believes they have a monopoly on pictures, videos, blogs and stories on Alabama sports.  I fail to see how you can demand a ransom unless you actually have a hostage!  So…let’s see if this prospective “hostage” can escape.

Generic Alabama sports sites:
- http://www.rolltide.com/
- http://www.al.com/sports/
- http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/team/alabama-crimson-tide-football
- http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/teams/aad

Alabama football sites:
- http://www.rolltide.com/sports/m-footbl/alab-m-footbl-body.html
- http://www.al.com/alabamafootball/
- http://bamaonline.com/
- http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/clubhouse?teamId=333
- http://www.bamapride.com/
- http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/teams/alabama-crimson_tide/

I guess 5 minutes is enough Googling, cutting and pasting to make the point.  C’mon, $10 a month?  I’m not even remotely interested in Alabama sports or even Alabama football, so starting from a dead stop I was able to find more sources of content in 5 minutes than I could read in a day.  Gee, I feel awfully free, unencumbered and potentially informed.

If you don’t actually have a hostage, don’t demand a ransom.  

” We do not negotiate with terrorists. We put them out of business.” – Scott McClellan

P.S.  Look closely at that photo – AALABALMAA?  Should have gone for “RETARDS”. Oh, somebody please explain the backwards “B” for me. Sheez!