Pentagon Lifts Ban On Coverage of Fallen Soldiers
By anniepa
@anniepa (27955)
United States
February 26, 2009 2:30pm CST
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Pentagon will lift its longtime ban on media coverage of the flag-draped coffins of war victims arriving at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, according to a senior U.S. defense official with direct knowledge of the decision.
The coverage must be approved by the victims' families, however.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/26/pentagon.media.war.dead/
What do you think about this new development? Advocates of lifting the ban have said Americans being able to view the fallen soldiers would make the cost of war seem more real. Do you agree? If you lost someone in war would you prefer to be able to feel, as one family mother of a fallen soldier said, "I wanted the nation to grieve with me, and if we don't see those images we don't know that these young men and women are dying. And to me its an honor to have an honor guard at Dover when they're bringing these men and women back through the mortuary. But we've never been able to see those pictures of the honor being given." Some family members have said they prefer to keep it private. I think this is a good practice, leaving it up to the victims' families. What do you think?
Annie
2 people like this
11 responses
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
26 Feb 09
Well I supported the ban because frankly, I can imagine the media using these poor fallen soldiers and their families as pawns in their opposition to the war. If we had a more fair media, it wouldn't be such an issue, but we know exactly where the media stands.
The lifting of the ban may not be too bad since the families of fallen soldiers are the ones making the decision. Still, I just have a bad feeling about the way the media will handle it.
2 people like this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
27 Feb 09
If the families weren't given the choice I'd also be for the ban but since they aren't the ones to make the decision I think it's appropriate. I'm sure you'll disagree with me but I always believed the ban was in place because if people could actually see photos and videos of the flag-draped coffins the war would be more real to them and I suspect that was motive of the Bush Administration.
Annie
@xParanoiax (6987)
• United States
27 Feb 09
It's better for the coverage to be out there, and for us to critisize it,and for it to be banned and hidden...and the people allowed to think of wars as "faraway" things.
Leaving it up to the families is the best we can do...and it allows freedom of the press, which while we may really dislike certain parts of the press sometimes and the occasional prevalance or propaganda...is still better than what we had.
1 person likes this
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
26 Feb 09
I'm on the fence about this one. TaskR made a great point that the images could be used as propaganda. But on the other hand I think it's important for people to reuly understand what it means to send people to war and develop a greater respect for the fine young men and women putting their necks on the chopping block every day for us. SO I'm not sure about this, I'm really not sure how I feel about it.
2 people like this
@Aingealicia (1905)
• United States
1 Mar 09
Annie,
I agree it is up to the families and friends. I do feel we should show more of the coffins coming home to make it more real for the people who don't see. I am one of those, like thousands, who have had friends dieing over there since '89'.
We as a nation should see what is going on. I feel there are a few images that should be shown that never are. Unlike most in the US, when I am downtown in Manhattan that hole is still in the ground and that pain is still there. There is a silence when you pass the WTC.
It is funny you posted this because the other day I was wondering if we would still be over there if we saw what was coming home for so long. Also I feel that the Soldiers and families/friends need more air time for those who do come home, not whole but broken, lest we ever forget their gift of freedom to us.
Ainge
Thank you so much for bringing this to light.
1 person likes this
@ladyluna (7004)
• United States
1 Mar 09
Hello Aing,
Please read Spalladino's response. It's highly relevant because of the slippery slope argument that all ethical matters inevitably broach.
In our not so distant past the media, and certain political movements, used and abused images of coffin draped fallen heroes, with a conteptably cavalier attitude. Devil may care about anything but their financial and socio-political motives. The grief, agony and loss was simply fodder for the media elites and the counter culture. How does that, in any way, honor the fallen?
By lifting the ban, Obama has now subjected future grieving families to the reality that once they grant permission to release the images, they no longer hold the right to object to any way that the media chooses to use those images. What's done in a moment of grief can never be undone!
It was an abuse of 'the fallen' as well as the suffering, grieving family during the Viet Nam era, and there is simply no reason to believe that today's even more scruples-challenged media will show any more restraint -- or respect.
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
27 Feb 09
As long as the family gets to make the decision I am fine with it. I just worry that our poor fallen heroes will be used for some sick entertainment value or for ratings by the networks. They deserve to be treated with more dignity than that. But as I said as long as the families get to make the choice I am fine with it. Some will want their privacy and they deserve to get it. SOme will want ot share their grief and that is fine too.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
27 Feb 09
That's how I feel, if the family can decide who I am I argue. I really can't put myself in the place of someone who's lost a loved one in a war because it's never happened to me and I really can't comprehend how I'd react but I know some people like the "pomp and circumstance" of a public recognition or whatever it would be called and others are more private people by nature. Whatever the case, they should definitely be treated with the dignity they deserve.
Annie
@KrauseHome (36447)
• United States
1 Mar 09
Well for me, it would depend on why they are showing the pictures and such. If it is just to help celebrate someone's memories and the life they lived and their time being able to serve in the Military then I am for it. I just hope it does not become a Big scene and not allow the family privacy and time to morn, etc. as well. But if a family would like to be able to share with others, and the public things about their son or daughter and their life it really should be up to them as well. Just my thoughts.
1 person likes this
@irisheyes (4370)
• United States
27 Feb 09
I definitely think it should be the decision of the families. Whatever helps them in their suffering and brings some closure. The media has always been respectful in their coverage but it does make one aware of the awful losses suffered in war and that might be something the families want us to know. Difficult as it may be for us to watch, it is a million times more difficult for the families of those young soldiers and I think the choice should be theirs.
1 person likes this
@HawaiiGopher (1009)
• Belgium
27 Feb 09
I'm all for it being unbanned. Since when is censorship justifiable because "so and so might use it to their advantage"?
1 person likes this
@collieluv28 (388)
• United States
27 Feb 09
I am in agreement with lifting the ban. I did feel that George W. Bush wanted the deaths from the Iraqi war hidden somehow. I am glad that the decision will be left to the family, however. Some may want their privacy. There should be a written policy that states clearly how far the media can go with this. It must be honorable & respectful. I like what George Stephanopolis does on his show every week - he lists the fallen heroes by name. We should be aware of our military deaths so that we will not forget that there are soldiers out their dying for our freedom. Too often we forget that.
