List of media claims that may turn out to be untrue.

[specious_reasons]

I love media during wartime, because all sorts of speculation gets on the air, a good portion of which turn out to be wrong. What do you say about making a list of interesting media claims and see how many of them turn out to be true?

A few of them seem to have been debunked already, like Tariq Azziz defecting, and using a double for Saddam in his last video.

I have a few I'd like to track:

- Iraq fired scuds (a prohibited weapon)
- Saddam is already dead (died during Wednesday's or Thursday's attack).
- The war's going to be long and bloody.
- The Iraqi army is going to roll over and give up.
- The "shock and awe" strategy has been abandoned.

[Barkhorn1x]

...really I do.

Don't get your hopes up - it won't last ;)

Barkhorn.

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by specious_reasons
I love media during wartime, because all sorts of speculation gets on the air, a good portion of which turn out to be wrong. What do you say about making a list of interesting media claims and see how many of them turn out to be true?

A few of them seem to have been debunked already, like Tariq Azziz defecting, and using a double for Saddam in his last video.

I have a few I'd like to track:

- Iraq fired scuds (a prohibited weapon)
- Saddam is already dead (died during Wednesday's or Thursday's attack).
- The war's going to be long and bloody.
- The Iraqi army is going to roll over and give up.
- The "shock and awe" strategy has been abandoned.

I don't consider the media claims of anything to be reliable in any way. Not because of shoddy reporting (although one might consider it of that) but because they are just trying to do something to account for the fact that they have nothing to do.

They were totally fried at the beginning. They were expecting a great light show in Baghdad, one that they could show all over the world and everyone would talk about. Instead, they got nothing. They are all sitting around with nothing to show, and little to talk about, so they start speculating.

In Gulf War I, people were captivated by the images we were getting from Iraq. How many of us stayed up pretty much all night the first night (Jan 20 or so) watching in fascination?

The first night of Gulf War II, I went to bed early. The president said the war had started, but basically, there was nothing to see.

For the most part, the live TV coverage has been boring. I like the descriptions the reporters with the units are giving, but I could just as well be reading them on the web. Watching a guy stand in the desert isn't very interesting. A guy this morning was reporting probably a couple of miles from a Kurdish town in the north and reported hearing gunfire. But we didn't hear it, so there wasn't much there.

So far, it has not been a TV war at all. Move along, people, nothing to see here.

[specious_reasons]

Originally posted by Barkhorn1x
...really I do.

Don't get your hopes up - it won't last ;)

Barkhorn.

The speculation won't last? ;)

[Barkhorn1x]

Originally posted by specious_reasons


The speculation won't last? ;)

...no the agreement. ;)

Have a good weekend.

Barkhorn.

[Smalso]

Those are not exactly media claims. They are claims made by others (experts?) and quoted in the media. There are other speculations to the contrary that are duly reported.

[specious_reasons]

Originally posted by Smalso
Those are not exactly media claims. They are claims made by others (experts?) and quoted in the media. There are other speculations to the contrary that are duly reported.

I guess that was one of the things I was going for. Since the war wasn't very TV friendly at the start, the networks had to trot out some talking heads. These experts produce varied claims.

Then, there's also the reports based on rumors or inaccurate information.

I'm actually interested in both kinds, I just wanted to do something like an archive of Sylvia's "prediction" and see how many will come true.

[zakur]

Yesterday I was reading reports of 8,000 to 10,000 Iraqi soldiers surrendering to coalition forces.

Today, that number is only 1,000 to 1,500.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by specious_reasons
I love media during wartime, because all sorts of speculation gets on the air, a good portion of which turn out to be wrong. What do you say about making a list of interesting media claims and see how many of them turn out to be true?

A few of them seem to have been debunked already, like Tariq Azziz defecting, and using a double for Saddam in his last video.

I have a few I'd like to track:

- Iraq fired scuds (a prohibited weapon)
- Saddam is already dead (died during Wednesday's or Thursday's attack).
- The war's going to be long and bloody.
- The Iraqi army is going to roll over and give up.
- The "shock and awe" strategy has been abandoned.

i hope saddam's other weapons are more effective than his 'banned' scuds. the few that were fired achieved exactly nothing.

[Beausoleil]

- Terrorists rolled a grenade into that army tent.

It turned out not to be true, but even so how can attacking a military target in wartime be terrorism? (The word came from the US military.)

[Troll]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


i hope saddam's other weapons are more effective than his 'banned' scuds. the few that were fired achieved exactly nothing.

Another slip up? You hope his other weapons are more effective? You mean you hope they actually kill some Americans, Brits, Aussies, perhaps Israelis or Kuwaitis if he launches them in those directions?

And then you wonder why you get called Anti-Anerican or simply someone that hates Americans, or an anti-semite for that matter. But it's good to know you're expanding the distaste to include the Brits the Aussies and the Kuwaitis. At least you're not limited.