LOL the NYT morning report thing was “Biden’s dilemma: look weak or start WW3” and that is not real nor is it a dilemma.
— Austin Gilkeson (@osutein) March 21, 2022
It is right and just to sympathize with the Ukrainian people. To offer them aid and asylum. It is evil to advocate war when you think you'll pay no price for it.
— Austin Gilkeson (@osutein) March 21, 2022
If you're framing the escalation question as "Don't be afraid of Putin, he doesn't have the stones to use nukes," you're already burning the wrong straw man.
The question is whether we want to him to take nuclear risks that can cascade toward disaster. /1— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) March 21, 2022
I'm tired of this argument being put as some sort of test of bravery or decency. People arguing for restraint and caution aren't arguing for surrender. They're arguing for restraint and caution, especially now that strategic victory is already out of Putin's reach. /2
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) March 21, 2022
I understand the urge to saddle up NATO and blast the Russia invaders to hell. But if the argument is "don't be afraid of Putin," it's a stupid argument. There are plenty of risks involved here that have nothing to do with Putin and everything to do with risks in wartime. /4x
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) March 21, 2022
One problem with leaving nuclear planning in the hands of the venerated nuclear priesthood is sometimes the priests have indulged in too much sacramental wine. pic.twitter.com/1G4TI0CvUs
— Christopher Clary (@clary_co) March 22, 2022
Is it a coincidence that American Old White Guys In Foreign Policy keep describing war in terms of "impotence" and "muscularity"?
— Cheryl Rofer (@CherylRofer) March 21, 2022
People seem to be engaging with this seriously when in fact it’s a piece of mental masturbation that epitomizes how for so much of the never-leave-your-desk commentariat, war is just a game, rather than pure horror https://t.co/wl7CrcqJ8q
— Miriam Elder (@MiriamElder) March 18, 2022
Ackshually… Jack Shafer has been a proud sh*tposter since long before the term was invented, which means he’s an expert on this particular media failing:
… Accusing journalists of loving war is a little like accusing windshield wipers of loving rain. War, like rain, is inevitable. Journalists exist to report on bloody conflict just as wiper blades were invented to protect our vision from inclement precipitation. This isn’t to imply that the profession’s love of combat causes war. There were wars, you’ll note, long before there were reporters. All those claims that a war-mongering William Randolph Hearst and his New York Journal promised to “furnish” the Spanish-American War if his photographer would only provide the pictures are pure myth.
Still, that love of war is back in full bloom now thanks to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, as the press fills its front pages and newscasts with the latest from Kyiv, Odesa, Lviv and Mariupol. But what drives that love? A few thumbnail explanations on that question.
War Sells. The news business has learned from experience that when war arrives, news interest spikes. Because it deals with life and death, war finds a pre-sold audience, and as long as combat lasts, the audience sticks around…
War Reporting Is Easy. Don’t get me wrong. Rushing to the front lines and reporting takes immense courage… But war rewards these daring men and women for their valor. Like the miracle of the loaves and fishes, war supplies reporters with an endless bounty of can’t-look-away stories, and that story is always changing. War offers scenes of raw human emotion, battlefield cliffhangers, tales about warring technologies and unbelievable visuals. (There’s a reason so many Hollywood blockbusters depict large, orange explosions.) The reporter who files eyewitness reports of tank battles or sniper exchanges can expect his copy to be painted Day-Glo orange by his editor and printed in prime space…
War Advances Careers. After surviving a tour of duty with honor, especially TV duty, a reporter can expect the career boost of a promotion or job dangles from competing outlets. Newspapers that previously declined to return your emails will now discover new interest in you. This is not to suggest reckless careerism on the part of war reporters, only to state the obvious…
But journalists aren’t war’s only lovers. As prefigured here a couple of times, there’s a demand side to the love equation that requires balancing. Readers and viewers covet “good news” stories about generosity and forgiveness. But few topics outside of war can attract a large, loyal audience for long, especially if the lines between good and evil have been drawn. Part of the appeal of the Ukraine war for both journalists and the news audience is that those lines are stark, allowing the audience to respond emotionally to the depiction of heroes and villains the clash creates. Journalists may love war, but so does the audience.
Late Night Open Thread: From A Safe Distance, the Media Craves WarPost + Comments (33)