Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/17

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Military censorship (long)
From: "Pilot E-Mail" <wwaechte@capecod.net>
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 13:43:33 -0700
References: <003201bfd852$fa9eeb20$91131840@computer>

Sal.
Please explain your meaning of the big difference between GIDDY and Pumped.

Major Waechter
USAF Retired
A member of the 345th  DEVIL HAWKS, The best dam Fighter Squadron of WW-II.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Sal DiMarco,Jr." <sdmp007@pressroom.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2000 04:55
Subject: [Leica] Military censorship (long)


> Luggers,
>         To further confuse the issue....
>         In Vietnam, the accredited media agreed to follow a set of
> guidelines set down by the military. Basically, it was don't report
anything
> which could give the enemy tactical information. Unit size, exact
location,
> etc....
>       For this, the media was given free access  to the battlefield,
> transportation, etc. when possible.
>       According to a Department of Defense (DoD) statement their
> "guidelines" were broken in Vietnam only twice, and by newbies who didn't
> know better.
>       Another factor, was Lyndon Johnson... He was a very powerful man,
and
> did not like to be told bad news. He said many times,  he did not want to
be
> the first American President to lose a war. So, things like "body counts"
> started and the military particularly the officers lost creditability with
> the media. Remember the "creditability gap?"  Looking after their careers,
> they blamed the media for their problems and the inept way they either
> conducted or were forced to conduct the war.
>      General William Westmoreland came out of the Vietnam War as a loser,
> not a hero. Unlike, Eisenhower in W.W.II and MacArthur in Korea.
>     I think the military leadership in this country felt the media was
> against them and decided for the next "war" the media would be "handled"
> differently.
>     The next "war" (my word) was Grenada. The military tried to sneak in
> without alerting the media. Probably a good from a strategic point of
view,
> but some people found out and were on hand when our troops landed. (please
> note-- they did NOT tell the bad guys.)
>     After the news broke, the military tried to limit access. This
> eventually led to
> the establishment of the DoD pool for future battles. The pool was a TV
> crew, a radio reporter, wire service reporter, wire service photographer
and
> magazine photographer. These people carried pagers and had to be ready to
> leave in a moments notice. They were to be given access and
> transmission facilities for their material until the situation was
> stabilized enough to allow more media on site.
>     The first test of the system was Panama. It failed. The military did
not
> allow the pool access to the action. TIME magazine sent
> me to Dover AFB to photograph first returning causalities and to pick-up
the
> DoD magazine pool film. The film was not on the flight. I later was told,
> the officer in charge of handling the packet deliberately delayed it.
FYI-
> He failed to realize how
> resourceful we can be. Sam Donaldson hand carried the film to Washington
the
> next day.
>     This brings us to the Gulf War. With months of planning, a system was
> agreed to by both sides. Again, the military failed to keep their
promises.
> Dispatches were delayed, lost and often heavily censored.
>     Two things I remember very well, David Turnley's photo of the soldier
> crying when he heard the person in the body bag next to him was his
friend,
> was held by the military censors for almost a week. The other was the pool
> reporter's dispatch from the first carrier based sorties. The reporter
> described the returning pilots as "giddy." The ship's captain without
> telling the reporter, changed the word to "pumped" along with changing
other
> non-military details and finally delaying transmission for an inexcusable
> amount of time. It may sound minor, but I think there is a big difference
> between giddy and pumped.
>     It turned out the best work was done by the reporters and
photographers
> who after trying to work with in the pool, abandoned it.
>     To be fair, I should remind everyone, the media and military are
> opposite side of the coin. In the military you are taught to obey and
follow
> orders. A good journalist learns to question authority and hopefully
search
> out the facts. Anyone who has ever contradicted a general knows what I
mean.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sal DiMarco, Jr.
>
>

Replies: Reply from Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com> (Re: [Leica] Military censorship (long))
In reply to: Message from "Sal DiMarco,Jr." <sdmp007@pressroom.com> ([Leica] Military censorship (long))