PressEthic

Journalists are often the first to shape how history views a war. Stephen Crane's narratives made heroes out of the Rough Riders, even though they fought precious few actual battles. John Hersey tempered the triumph of World War II in the public imagination by exposing the horror of nuclear war with Hiroshima, a book often credited with inciting the movement against nuclear weapons.

In the current war – or conflict, depending on whom you ask – in Iraq, this sort of accepted narrative framework is beginning to take hold. Its evolution is in fine display in Patrick J. McDonnell's new piece in the Los Angeles Times Magazine, titled "Their War, My Memories."

McDonnell's article, which is rich in detail, tackles a question facing newsrooms across the country: is it too soon to take a look back at the war? What is clearly missing in many of the daily dispatches is what a battle here or a bombing there adds up to. Often it is too soon to tell. But unlike a war such as World War II, fought mostly in battles for territory, a war such as Iraq or Vietnam necessitates articles such as McDonnell's in order to keep the public informed of progress, or lackthereof. It's simply not as easy as reporting on a march to Berlin, or the march to Baghdad for that matter.

McDonnell's narrative, which takes readers from the inception of war on the ground to its present state, should also be required reading for those who make Fox News claims that journalists are somehow anti-military. McDonnell writes,

"Among the journalists in our camp, nerves were becoming frayed as "I-Day," or the day of the invasion, neared. Some had decided not to go in during the first 24 hours, expecting a blood bath. We were all feeling queasy and not getting much sleep. An experienced broadcast journalist who had opted to stay behind asked what I and my colleague, Times photographer Luis Sinco, intended to do. We had decided to go in, largely because to do otherwise would have felt like a betrayal of the Marines who had been decent enough to share their lives with us. "Don't ask me to push your wheelchair," the broadcast guy sneered at me."

News organizations should purse more narrative-driven stories such as this one that show how we've come to the current situation. Maybe, in fact, it's not journalism at all that's flawed, but the blow-dried and glanced-over version of it. Which, in the course of history and to the average consumer of news, is more important? A guy who is willing to risk his life and run into a war armed only with a pen, or a guy paid millions of dollars to pontificate in a studio about how the war is going?