Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy

Analysis:

This story provides very little journalism and is primarily a forum of stenography, where viewers are provided a brief summary of the issue and a sound bite from Pat Robertson calling for the assassination for Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. The story doesn’t explore the implications of this assassination call, both in terms of US relations with Venezuela, nor the legality of such a claim.

There are also no other voices heard in this story other than Pat Robertson’s. Particularly relevant would be a Venezuelan perspective, which Fox 17 does not provide. There is also no contextual information, particularly the US relationship with Venezuela since Chavez became President.

Story:

WXMI 17 News reader – A prominent Christian broadcaster wants the US to assassinate the President of Venezuela. Pat Robertson’s comments are causing a big uproar tonight. The White House says he went way too far, but Robertson is sticking with it. On his show the 700 Club he said “Hugo Chavez is going to turn Venezuela into a launching pad for Communist infiltration and Muslim extremism.

Pat Robertson – We have the ability to take him out and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don’t need another $200 billion war to get rid of one strong arm dictator.

News reader – Chavez says he doesn’t even know who Robertson is. The televangelist ran for President in 1988. The Christian broadcast network says about a million people watch his show everyday.

Total Time: 48 seconds

Analysis:

This story basically plays into and perpetuates a limited debate between the two major political parties in Michigan. This is underscored by how the reporter frames the issue at the beginning when he says “it feels like fall doesn’t it. That is what happens when you combine the cool weather with a campaign for Governor that is already quite hot.” Viewers should ask themselves what is hot about the two major political parties making different claims?

The story is premised on claims by both sides having to do with job creation and job loss in Michigan. Viewers hear both Michigan Democratic Party Chair Mark Brewer and GOP Gubernatorial Candidate Dick DeVos. They both make claims, but by the end of the story viewers have no idea which is telling the truth, especially since the reporter does not seek to independently verify either of the claims made. Viewers could ask themselves if an independent perspective or organization that looks at job loss or job creation in Michigan was also included in the story would that change your understanding of the issue?

Story:

WZZM 13 TV News reader – In other news today the Democrats made the claim months ago about the GOP’s leading contender for Governor sending jobs overseas. Now the Republicans respond. Today the fight for Michigan’s top seat heats up.

Reporter – Lee, it feels like fall doesn’t it. That is what happens when you combine the cool weather with a campaign for Governor that is already quite hot.

Reporter – It’s about this, Amway’s $200 million dollar investment in China. In the 90’s Republican Gubernatorial candidate Dick DeVos was President of the company and helped open a plant there. While here in Michigan the company was trimming 600 jobs.

Dick DeVos – We expect that majority of the impact was going to be in the administrative areas as opposed to manufacturing.

Reporter – Michigan’s Democratic Party chairman…..

Mark Brewer – This is the record. Reduce employment in Michigan and invest overseas.

Reporter – ….has goaded DeVos about this for eleven weeks.

Mark Brewer – …..but he has not done a single thing in his tenure, as head of Amway, which has benefited the people of Michigan in terms of creating and keep jobs in this state.

Reporter – Finally, Monday DeVos responded.

Dick DeVos – Well it’s an absolute falsehood what the Governor is perpetuating, but it is understandable because the Governor would clearly rather talk about me than talk about the failed agenda of the Granholm administration.

Reporter – DeVos says China required Amway to build manufacturing there if they wanted to sell there.

Dick DeVos – The net result of the investment has been hundreds of jobs in Michigan, but not one job was moved from Michigan to China.

Reporter – Democrats Monday also alleged Amway imported product from China to America. Something DeVos’ spokesman denied.

DeVos Spokesman – Alticor has been a great success story for Michigan. The Governor on the other hand has been a big failure for Michigan.

Mark Brewer – I think we need to have a debate. I think we need to have a debate….

Reporter – And I think there will be plenty of debates. In fact, they are already underway for an election over 14 months away.

Total Time – 2 minutes and 3 seconds

Analysis:

In our studies on local media coverage of the Iraq war, we have noted that the local TV stations relied almost exclusively on official sources, government or military, for war reporting. These news outlets acted primarily as a conduit for official sources, rarely questioning or providing other perspectives, whether they are national or local. And yet, in the limited instances where the local media do report on a local event or action opposed to the war, great efforts are made to provide “balance” by including pro-war voices.

The coverage of yesterday’s national vigil to show support for Cindy Sheehan was no exception. While all three TV stations and the Grand Rapids Press covered the event, the coverage was superficial and lacked context. WZZM 13 ran a fairly lengthy piece in which they gave brief quotes from some of the organizers and participants of the vigil. After the piece ended, the newsreader stated: “Now that you’ve heard from the people who think that US forces should pull out of Iraq, we’d like to hear from those of you in support of the war. So you can call our talkback line at that number right there, 559-1302 and tell us why you think American military should stay in Iraq, we’ll listen to some of your responses at the end of tonight’s newscasts.” Some of these call-in responses were then played at the end of the broadcast.

Providing more than one perspective on an issue is one of the requirements of good journalism. And yet, it seems that the local media seem to hold to this standard only when reporting on voices or events that are critical of the war in Iraq, and not vice-versa. Stories and articles reporting on local soldiers and families, which make up a large percentage of the local news coverage of the Iraq war, almost never contain any perspectives critical of US government policy. In stories about unfolding events in Iraq, the voices presented are almost always governmental or military, and if an opposing voice is heard, it quite often is still coming from a “official” source, that is, an opposition voice within the government. Grass roots and citizen groups opposed to the war, while representing the concerns and opinions of large percentages of the American populace, are usually excluded, or if included, are juxtaposed with opposing voices.

Story:

News reader – A grieving Texas mother has become the focal point of the division in this country over the war in Iraq. Cindy Sheehan’s son died in Iraq and for the last twelve days she’s been holding a vigil outside President Bush’s ranch. She wants to talk to the president again and believes we should withdraw from Iraq now. She’s also accused the president of being a terrorist himself. Well tonight many are supporting Sheehan through vigils of their own, from this one in Washington DC to here in Holland and Grand Rapids. Tonight WZZM 13’s Kathy Reynolds has their story.

Reporter – In Monument park they light candles, one hundred strangers with only a feeling in common, a feeling of loss.

Diane Thole – Whether they’re wounded or coming home in a coffin, it’s just awful to hear.

Woman #2 – I just can’t comprehend what it must be like to lose a son or a daughter.

Reporter – this vigils one of more than fourteen hundred happening across the country, all in support of a woman they’ve never met.

Sheehan – this is a way that I can honor my son’s memory, by standing up and doing what I know is right too.

Reporter – Cindy Sheehan is a military mom whose son died in Iraq. She’s camping outside of President Bush’s Texas ranch.

Thole #1 – Cindy wants to meet with the President.

Man #2 – If I had my opportunity I’d be there with her.

Thole #1 – I relate to her like a sister.

Reporter – so many feel so close to Cindy, close to her message.

Woman #1 – She’s had a son in the military but she has always believed in peace. And that’s very much my own story.

Reporter – Diane Thole’s son is stationed near Baghdad.

Thole – this blue star means my son is still alive, you get a gold star when they die, and I’ve got a gold candle.

Reporter – Candles for strangers who have lost their lives and support for the families left behind. In Grand Rapids, Kathy Reynolds, WZZM 13 News.

Newsreader – Tonight’s nationwide vigils were organized by the political group Move on.org, a liberal advocacy group. Now that you’ve heard from the people who think that US forces should pull out of Iraq, we’d like to hear from those of you in support of the war. So you can call our talkback line at that number right there, 559-1302 and tell us why you think American military should stay in Iraq, we’ll listen to some of your responses at the end of tonight’s newscasts.

Analysis:

This story is what appears to be based on a press release from the American Beverage Association. This organization is not a neutral group. A look at their board of directors should be an indicator to people about what their interests are.

The story claims that the industry group wants to “join the fight against the increasing rate of childhood obesity,” but the channel 8 news reader never questions the industry intentions, nor provides a different perspective. The story provides the claim from the American Beverage Association that “drinks are not inherently bad and can be fine for active children who eat correctly.” This comment provides no context, such as the tremendous lobbying that the industry and individual soda companies engage in to push their products on children.

Story:

WOOD TV 8 News reader – Well, here is a story that ought to have lots of parents talking. The American Beverage Association is saying that they think it is a good idea to remove soda pop from elementary schools. Imagine that. The group recommended Tuesday that such drinks be pulled from vending machines in elementary schools. Their reasoning? The industry needs to join the fight against the increasing rate of childhood obesity. The groups’ president argues drinks are not inherently bad and can be fine for active children who eat correctly, but he says parents need to be sure their children are not getting excessive amounts of sugary drinks in school. Under the groups’ recommendation, Middle schoolers would have access to other kinds of drinks – like sports drinks, diet soda, and low calorie juices. High School students do have access to soda and the other drinks, but the machine would also have to be stocked with no more than 50% soda.

Total Time: 52 seconds

Analysis:

This story is one example of the numerous stories that appear int he local news whenever the price of gas rises significantly. In the three days from Aug 15 through Aug 17, the three local TV stations ran a combined total of seventeen stories on gas prices. Despite the large number of stories dedicated to this topic, very little information is usually offered as to why prices are rising. In this particular piece, a few possible reasons are offered, but with no elaboration. The viewer is told that gas prices are going up because of the London bombings and nuclear power plants in Iran but no clear linkage of these factors is provided. An expert is sourced as the president of IRN, but it is never explained what IRN is. Would it matter to the viewer to know that IRN is a local consulting firm serving the automotive industry? No other independent voices are presented representing consumer advocacy, environmental or alternative energy perspectives. Viewers should ask themselves why does the local news dedicate so much time reporting on gas prices, something that anyone that drives a motor vehicle is certainly aware of.

Story:

WXMI Newsreader – How high will they go? Rising gas prices with no relief in sight. The average cost for unleaded in Michigan is now $ 2.71, that’s up 67 cents from a year ago. Fox 17’s Rachel Calderon is live in Grand Rapids to show how people are coping with it.

Reporter – Amy, the cost for regular unleaded gas at some stations around town earlier today was about $2.55 a gallon, that’s a steal compared to where they are now $2.79 and it also looks like the cost to run a business is on its way up.

The sign at J Morello’s Pizzeria used to say fast and free delivery. Owner Jeff Murell says six months ago that had to change.

Murell – We went from free delivery to a dollar charge per delivery which I give straight to my drivers because of the gas issue with increasing prices.

Reporter – the added fee isn’t sitting well with customers. Explaining why doesn’t get him much sympathy.

Murell – But these guys are driving their own cars and paying their own insurance, I have to charge a dollar to give them something otherwise it cost them money to come to work.

Reporter – Grant Dubridge spent $ 84 filling up his carpet cleaning van. He said raising his rates isn’t something he wants to do.

Dubridge – It’s cutting into my costs, my profits, my ability to pay for my family, my home, my food.

Reporter – High gas prices are keeping kids at Shannon Franklin’s daycare center indoors this summer.

Franklin – We take the kids on outings and stuff like that but we try to cut it down because it’s high.

Reporter – The price around Grand Rapids, $ 2.79 a gallon. On May 27th gas was under 2 bucks. Economy experts say the hikes are a combination of what’s happening around the world, attacks in London, nuclear power plants in Iran, and what those events might do to the worlds oil supply. Key words: might.

Kim Kourth (IRN President) – Nothing Real. Nothing that actually has happened as yet. And then you have some industry structural issues where there are a fair number of refineries that were taken down for repair and maintenance.

Reporter – Kim believes the prices could come down soon but at the BP gas station, another problem.

Elayne Durham (BP Cashier) – You’re busy working at the register and you glance up to check the pumps and they’ll look you right in the eye and get in their car and drive away.

Reporter – The person that did got away with $ 63 in gas. With prices going up, stations say they are seeing more and more drive offs. And driving off is a larceny, if you do get caught you could spend up to 93 days behind bars, a second offense, you could lose your license. Live in Grand Rapids, Rachel Calderon, Fox 17 News at 10.

News reader – thanks Rachel, and we have all been on a roller coaster lately, gas prices going up and slowly falling. A few months ago we found prices for unleaded in Grand Rapids under two dollars, that was back in May. Compare that with today. Some stations jumped more than 30 cents in just a few hours. Last December it was at $ 1.65. and back in 2002 a gallon of unleaded was going for a dollar twenty. The all time high after figuring inflation, way back in 1982 a gallon of gas was over three dollars.

Analysis:

This story is problematic on many levels. First, the language that is used frames the story in such a way as to negate or minimize the fact that the land being “Handed over” to the Palestinians was their land to begin with. This fact is down played since there is only one reference to the 1967 War, which began the 38 year occupation of Palestinian land, an illegal occupation as stated in the United Nations Resolution 242.

Second, the only voices viewers hear are that of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and former Israeli Cabinet Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. No Arab perspectives or independent voices are heard.

Lastly, while it may be true that Ariel Sharon is now receiving death threats, this point is taken out of context. To be fair, there would have to be some mention of the historical treatment and abuse of Palestinians under the occupation.

Story:

WXMI 17 News reader – Israeli troops bracing for most certain trouble tonight. The deadline for settlers to leave Gaza has come and passed. Now the Army is waiting for sunrise to move in a force them out. Handing over the land to the Palestinians.

Reporter – Israel took this land in 1967 during the so-called 6-day war. The man who helped lead that campaign is the same man who is telling his countrymen they have got to give up their homes and get out. The land is being given back to the Palestinians.

Ariel Sharon – We are taking this step with great anguish. We can not hold on to Gaza forever.

Reporter – But Prime Minister Ariel Sharon knows many of these residents are about to leave peacefully. Some are burning their homes and cars, shouting curses at the soldiers who have come to lead them away. Their determination buoyed by outside activists who snuck into the area. They claim they are anxious to take part in a last stand if that is what it comes to. Over the next few days Israeli troops will go house to house. They say they will be gentle at first but they will result to brute force if necessary. There have already been a few dozen arrests. Those who continue to defy the evacuation orders stand to lose roughly half of the compensation they have been offered by the government. No matter they say, this isn’t about money. They don’t want Palestinians to ever live on their land.

Former Israeli Cabinet Minister Netanyahu – I think this will in all likelihood this will become a base of terror.

Reporter – That is one opinion. Others in the government hope that Israel’s withdraw will help jump start the peace process, but it is really too soon to know what will come of all this upheaval. As we understand only roughly half of the 9,000 settlers that have been told to leave have complied. Now five times that many soldiers are on the scene. They’ll spend the next three weeks clearing out the area before the empty homes are bulldozed and the land is handed back to the Palestinians.

WXMI 17 News reader – Sharon support among Israeli’s is way down tonight and he is not going anywhere without body guards surrounding him at all times. He has apparently received numerous death threats.

Total Time: 2 minutes and 2 seconds

Analysis:

First, the story doesn’t say who organized the protest, which sort of implies that it is this one woman crusade. You can see in the video b-roll the name of one of the groups, Bring Them Home Now, yet this group not any of the other organizations involved were never mentioned in the story. Second, the reasons for the protest are not provided other than to simply say that Sheehan’s son was killed in Iraq in 2004. Sheehan did provide the more substantive reasons for her protest, but channel 8 did not run those. Here is an excerpt of those comments “I want him to tell me is ‘just what was the noble cause Casey died for?’ “Was it freedom and democracy? Bullshit! He died for oil. He died to make your friends richer. He died to expand American imperialism in the Middle East. We’re not freer here, thanks to your PATRIOT Act. Iraq is not free. You get *America out of Iraq* and *Israel out of Palestine* and you’ll stop the terrorism. There, I used the “I” word, imperialism, and now I’m going to use another “I” word, impeachment because we cannot have these people pardoned. They need to be tried on war crimes and go to jail.” A question for listeners to consider is, if comments like these are included in the story, does that change how the public understands what is going on? What we have found in our news monitoring is that while protests might be reported on from time to time, the reasons for the protest are rarely given.

Story:

WOOD TV 8 News reader – President Bush spoke publicly today about the California mother who has been protesting outside his Texas ranch. The woman’s son died in Iraq a year ago.
Reporter – Cindy Sheehan says her grief turned to anger, but feels the two demands she brought from California to a tent in Crawford. Sheehan – This is George Bush’s accountability moment and we are not leaving Crawford until we hold him accountable.
Reporter – Accountable for the deaths of US troops, including her oldest son Casey, an Army specialist, killed in Iraq last year. Sheehan met the President then, but wants another meeting now turn urge Mr. Bush to withdraw from Iraq. Sheehan – He is on vacation here for 5 weeks. I don’t understand why he can’t take an hour to speak with somebody who’s life he has devastated. Reporter – Other military families joined her here. Demonstrators planted hundreds of crosses to line the dusty road. While senior advisors said the President understands and respects her position he does not plan to meet Sheehan and says a full pull-out of troops would be wrong. Bush – Listen, I sympathize with Mrs. Sheehan. She feels strongly about her position and she has every right in the world to say what she believes. This is America, she has a right to her position.
Total Time: 1 minute 22 seconds

Analysis:

This is a rather short news clip, being less than half a minute long. It starts out with the newsreader stating that “US forces on a major offensive to route out insurgents in Iraq, Operation Quick strike is unfolding north west of Baghdad where 22 marines were killed just last week.” Rather than providing any more information about this operation, the rest of the story is some grainy aerial footage of what is described as insurgents firing a mortar and then being destroyed by a missile fired by a US drone. In the report it is noted that the footage is provided by the pentagon. This footage is available online at the DVIDS website, which is a site run by the military providing news stories and footage to news agencies. On the DVIDS website this same footage is available but it is identified as “Aerial Imagery of insurgents detonating a car bomb”, a very different description than what is offered in the story. Looking at the footage it’s hard to tell which is the accurate description of events. Also worth noting is that according to the DVIDS site, this clip was filmed on Aug 2. Operation Quick Strike, which is what the story is supposed to be about, was launched on August 5th, three days later, so this footage actually is not related to this operation.

Story:

WXMI 17 Newsreader – US forces on a major offensive to route out insurgents in Iraq, Operation Quick Strike is unfolding northwest of Baghdad where twenty two marines were killed just last week. Tonight the Pentagon is releasing some video from one of those UAV remote control spy planes. It spots some insurgents firing mortar rounds from a school yard. They escaped in a car but the unmanned drone then follows them to a safe house and then launches a hellfire missile at the building, killing all the terrorists inside.

Total Time: 25 seconds

Analysis:

This story was basically framed as a continuation of the official US government position, which basically says that the bombing of Hiroshima & 3 days later Nagasaki, were necessary to end the war and that it saved American lives. The main perspectives were that of 2 local WWII veterans, both of which state that the Hiroshima bombing was the right thing to do. The veterans also made claims about what was happening in the Pacific war at the time and that the Japanese Army “were the most barbaric fighters imaginable.”

The only other perspectives provided were that of 4 people who were randomly asked the question “Was it the right decision to drop the bomb on Hiroshima?” This is a pretty meaningless exercise for the Press, since these people have no apparent knowledge or expertise about this important historical event, it was just a person on the street perspective. The great omission here however, is that no where do other facts appear about the first atomic bombing. For years much of the internal documentation about the Hiroshima bombing had been classified, but now is available for the public to read. The National Security Archives has recently posted much of this documentation online. In reading these documents it becomes clear that the decision to drop the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had more to do with sending a strong message to the Russians at the time and that Japan was on the verge of surrendering, thus few America soldiers would have lost their lives had the bomb not been used.

Story:

Local WWII vets back using atomic weapon
By Ted Roelofs
The Grand Rapids Press

Like a lot of guys on the USS Indianapolis, William Mulvey was curious about the big wooden crate they took on board in San Francisco. He shrugged it off as just another secret of war.

He learned later in a hospital on Guam he had helped deliver the bomb 60 years ago that exploded over Hiroshima on Aug. 6, 1945.

“I think it was a good thing to do,” the 87-year-old Wyoming resident said. “That’s what ended the war, the bomb.”
Cascade Township resident Bernard Link was stationed in Hawaii, preparing with other members of the 5th Marine Division to invade Japan. He figured there was a good chance he and thousands of grunts like him would die in the effort.

Then he heard about Hiroshima.

Link, 79, never questioned President Harry S. Truman’s decision to unleash that terrible weapon. “I think in the last analysis it was the most humane thing that he could have done,” Link said. “It spared tens of thousands of Japanese lives, and it spared tens of thousands of our lives.”

The bomb incinerated 4 square miles of Hiroshima and killed about 140,000 people instantly or within a few months. Including those initially listed as missing or who died afterward from a loosely defined set of bomb-related ailments, including cancers, Hiroshima officials now put the total number of the dead at 237,062.

The Japanese agreed to surrender Aug. 14, five days after a second bomb decimated Nagasaki. That bomb killed about 80,000 people. Officials now link 137,339 deaths to that attack.

The explosion over Hiroshima ignited a debate with us today about the ethics of war and the use of weapons so potent they could obliterate humanity. Was it a necessary evil to cut short a brutal war? Or did it open a door through which there is no going back?

Link believes that those who pass judgment on Hiroshima gloss over the realities of combat in the Pacific. He learned those lessons first-hand, when he was part of the U.S. invasion of Iwo Jima in February 1945.
Link was a 19-year-old private who came ashore with the first wave of Marines. On the third day, he took shrapnel to the face and jaw that barely missed his carotid artery.

In some of the most vicious fighting of World War II, American forces suffered 25,000 casualties on just 8 square miles of volcanic terrain, including 6,800 killed. Most of the 22,000 Japanese on the island fought to the death, many in night-time bayonet suicide attacks.

“They were the most barbaric fighters imaginable,” he said. “In my mind, they were so fanatical in their devotion to their emperor and their country, and they were absolutely fearless fighters.”

Link sometimes wonders which is worse — the death suffered by the Japanese on Iwo Jima, where soldiers dug into caves and tunnels were incinerated by napalm — or death by atomic bomb. “I have seen people who have been incinerated by napalm, and I would take death by atomic bomb any time,” he said.

In April, American forces reached Okinawa, the last island step before invading Japan. That battle cost 12,000 Americans killed and 36,000 wounded. The Japanese suffered 107,000 soldiers killed and an estimated 100,000 civilian deaths.

War planners used Okinawa as a model to project the number of American lives invasion might cost. Japanese troop strength on the southern island of Kyushu — a likely invasion target — was projected to be at least 350,000. Casualty estimates ranged as high as 220,000.

Truman got word the evening of July 16 the atomic bomb had been successfully tested at Alamogordo, N.M. He never hesitated in approving its use over Japan.

By then, Chief Master at Arms William Mulvey was on a speed run aboard the USS Indianapolis toward the Pacific island of Tinian, near Guam. On board the battle cruiser, inside a black canister and large wooden crate that was sealed and guarded 24 hours a day, lay the components for the bomb.

Mulvey watched as a crane unloaded the crate July 26 on Tinian, while a contingent of high-ranking officers stood by.
“This thing here seemed a little unusual,” Mulvey remembered thinking.

The cargo later would be transported to the airfield on Tinian and loaded onto a B-29 called the Enola Gay. A few days later, a Japanese submarine happened upon the Indianapolis as it steamed toward the Philippines. A pair of torpedoes slammed into the ship, splitting it in two. It slipped to the bottom a few minutes after midnight July 30.
Of 1,196 men aboard, nearly 300 died in the explosion or were trapped when the ship went down. About 900 escaped into the sea, including Mulvey. Four-and-a-half days later, rescuers plucked Mulvey and 320 others from the sea.

The rest had drowned, died of dehydration or were eaten by sharks.
Mulvey was transferred to a Marine hospital on the island of Peleliu, then transported to a hospital on Guam. He dimly recalls a priest administering last rites as he hovered near death.
As he regained strength on Guam, he finally learned about the bomb. He thought then what he thinks today: They did the right thing. “It’s war,” he said.