Is anyone else paying attention to how the media coverage of the war has changed in a year?
When Bush was president, the media fought to cover the return of us casualties and deceased service members' caskets, and it demanded entry into Walter Reed and other hospitals to show the horrors. Everk wee or so, most of the big papers had full-page color photos and bios or every American killed overseas. The whole thing was meant to stir a public drumbeat against the war as an attack on Bush, presumably with the intent of getting a Democrat elected in the next election.
Well a Democrat was elected--with full mainstream media participation and assistance--and now Barack Obama owns the war. He promised to immediately end it many times when he was campaigning (just like he promised to close the still-open Guantanamo detention facility) but he has only escalated it and we now have more troops either overseas or heading overseas than we have since Vietnam. And the media, rather than continuing it's opposition, has flipped completely. Now they never want to show coffins coming back to Dover, even though there are more of them. They don't report on every single soldier killed, like they did when Bush was running it, and the pictures of the fallen are no longer printed. Now it's like our soldiers don't count since they cannot be used to attack a president that the media didn't like and mentioning them might reflect badly on one that they do like.
Am I the only one who sees this and has a problem with it?