submission info

news sources certainly haven't been at a lack of stuff to report on, with more scares at schools everywhere following last months violence.

regardless, the issue still in the spotlight is the bombing in serbia. is it every single day now that we hear that another group of civilians has been killed or wounded by nato bombs? notice the media isn't too pro-nato, war gung-ho anymore? even the media sees what way the wind is blowing and has picked up on general public discontent. the news is about advertising dollars, and is, most of all, about its audience. there is little, if anything, good about the war to broadcast anymore. reports trickle in about refugees settling ok in canada, but for the most part it is "whoops!" by nato every night on the news.

ultimately this is looking like a big public-relations fiasco for nato/u.s.

one thing is notable about how the media is dealing with all the "collateral damage" we are hearing about- the fact is that the media CAN deal with this. i imagine many other past military strikes had a much easier time getting by with heavy civilian casualty simply because the media wasn't there to show it every day. with the mass information we are getting about the war we are also getting an exponential understanding of the human element. war is no longer about watching precision attacks, but about shaking your head at another stupid nato mistake. in the past, we undoubtedly would have continued to hear only good things about how well the bombing runs were going. look at the gulf war- there was much talk about how great their "smart" bombs were. now we know the reality of how many bombs went well off target. we no longer have hindsight because information is flowing in from everywhere instantly. the media has the "now" to deal with, and the public is allowed to immediately register its discontent. question is whether nato is listening.

send your media-bites to