In the past few days, there have been several articles in the Grand Rapids Press that reflect a certain level of bias in reporting on the United States' occupation of Iraq. On Friday, March 28 there was a front page story headlined, "The fight is still under way: Despite latest Flare-up in Baghdad, Kent City Soldier Sees Signs of Hope."
In this story, Army Captain Dennis Louck, speaking from Baghdad, claims that things in Iraq are improving and that the Iraqis are now willing to fight for their freedom. The story concludes with the Army Captain as saying, "We all want to feel we are part of something better in dreaming of something better for the Iraqi people." The story is full of claims made by this military spokesperson, yet there are no other voices that might provide a different point of view and the Grand Rapids Press' reporter makes no attempt at verifying the claims made by the military. In addition, the Press doesn't question a military spokesperson, even though there is declassified evidence of a clear Pentagon media strategy to disseminate false information about the war in Iraq, as well as the use of the Lincoln Group, a Washington-based group that won a Pentagon contract to promote "positive stories about US military operation in Iraq."
By comparison, last month a US Iraq War veteran and an Iraqi spoke in Grand Rapids with a much different perspective. Raed Jarrar said that with regard to training Iraqis, most Iraqis wish the United States would stop as they are most often training sectarian militias that fuel the violence. He also said that US policy has promoted tensions between Sunnis and Shiites as it has given power to minority parties that have little support in Iraq. Instead of creating a government dedicated towards achieving "national reconciliation," the United States has instead sought to have "native validators" that act in the interest of the United States. Unfortunately, most of those who live in West Michigan and have easy access would have heard this perspective, since the Grand Rapids Press did not cover this.
On Saturday, March 29 the Press ran a story based upon an interview with Michigan Senator Carl Levin on US policy in Iraq. In the story, the Press reporter claims, "Levin has been a persistent critic of the war since it began in March 2003. He was one of 22 senators to vote against the 2002 resolution that authorized President Bush to use force in Iraq." While it is true that Levin voted against the resolution in 2002 he has voted for every piece of legislation to fund the US occupation of Iraq since 2003. Levin's comments in the Press story were consistent with previous statements in that he blamed the Iraqis for the current problems in their country. The article states, "Levin cited evidence he believes underscores the failure of the Iraqi government to stand up for its own security, from the inaction of its troops to an estimated $30 billion in surplus oil sales it has failed to invest in its own people." Again, there is no source that is cited to support this "evidence" and there are no other perspectives other than Senator Levin's.
On Sunday, March 30 the Press editorial continued this line of thinking, stating, "President Bush and the U.S. government must force Iraq Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his parliament to view factional cooperation, oil revenue sharing, the delivery of basic services and the establishment of civil order as urgent necessities -- not conditions that can be attained in due time as U.S. soldiers continue to police the nation's unruly streets." the Press editorial does not assign any responsibility to the US occupation for causing the current problems in Iraq and only recognizes the US losses over the past 5 years. In the opening statement the editorial says, "The United States has now marked two milestones in the Iraq war: five years of fighting, 4,000 lives lost. Add other daunting statistics -- nearly 30,000 wounded and $600 billion spent -- and the war's toll on the American people gains sobering perspective." Again, Iraqi voices or perspectives are not reflected, nor is the enormous loss of Iraqi lives. A 2006 study by Johns Hopkins University estimated that 655,000 Iraqi civilians have died since the beginning of the US occupation in 2003.
This kind of reporting and editorializing is in stark contrast to how the Press has reported on local anti-war activities. In the most recent demonstration that took place in Grand Rapids on March 15 to mark the fifth anniversary of the US occupation of Iraq, the Press' coverage provided little print space to those who organized the march and gave an equal amount of print space to a man who was part of a group of 5 that harassed the antiwar marchers. Imagine if the Press gave anti-war groups an opportunity to respond to the claims made by politicians like Senator Levin or US Army spokesperson like Captain Louck? By not providing these perspectives when those who favor the US occupation of Iraq are featured in Grand Rapids Press stories, it demonstrates a clear bias in reporting.
