Pakistan's cows are more important than American troop deaths: Washington Post

In today's WAPO on p. A6, five columns with two color illustrations start at the top of the page and flow below the fold consuming more than a half page. The subject? The drownings and demise of Pakistan's cattle: "Livestock losses compound Pakistan's misery."

WAPO gives the single remaining gutter column to the deaths of seven American troops in Afghanistan.

WAPO sends a reporter to Pakistan to write about cows but is only able to pull up an AP story on deaths of our soldiers. Where are its priorities?

Who's left at the WAPO? All the editors are gone. Are teenagers running the joint now? Do they know where Afghanistan is? Or how to spell it? In Sunday's paper its own ombudsman complains about the paper's continuing decline. Pitiful is what it is.

NYT abandons American troop casualties in Afghanistan

Usually, when a news alert arrives from either the New York Times or the Washington Post, another arrives from the competitor within minutes.

Not so yesterday.

At 10:28 a.m. the Post sent an alert: Bombings kill 8 U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan

When did the alert arrive from the NYT? Five and a half hours later when the Times put it in its lead in the 4 p.m. online edition.

Importance?

Why bother, Washington Post?

Buried in the left corner at the bottom of page A10 in Saturday's (September 26, 2009) paper in the section "World Digest" under Afghanistan, are four paragraphs with a heading (not big enough for a headline):

5 U.S. Troops Killed in Attacks in South

Why bother, Washington Post? They were only five. Five soldiers who don't matter. Why even bother to put them in at all? The huge stories you have on Indian defense and mandatory flu shots are surely more important, but what? One hundred paragraphs on them was not enough and you had to squeeze the deaths? You supporting the Defense Department's order for more troops and you're trying to minimize more losses? Or maybe it's the green crew you've got in now, which can't exactly pinpoint Afghanistan's location nor does it know anything about our troops there or the past. Maybe Washington Post, you better get in some people with some history who know a thing or two about world events, more than the crew you've got now which relies on wire service stories and can't tell a dead soldier from a fighter jet.

The news is all the same

Do you flip back and forth between the networks and wonder how and why they place their stories in the same order? And devote more or less the same amount of time to each?

The front pages of Friday's Washington Post and New York Times are almost the same above the fold. They must have been made up by the same editor!

In the left single column in both papers is the SEC story charging the Countrywide leader with fraud. The headlines are similar; not exact, but similar. Well, you say, it's the same story!

Then splashed across the rest of the top fold of both papers is the Obama Mideast speech with several color pictures of individuals and groups from the Mideast and Asia watching the speech. The only difference is that all the NYT pictures show males only. A family picture in the Post has some females.

Wouldn't you think one or two of the photos would be of Obama? Or some of the other leaders? Or the locale of the speech?

Is the main stream media now under the same ownership and direction and the announcements have not been made? Do they collaborate? Do the networks collaborate? Are the editors out of the same school? Of thought? Just wondering.

Timeline of Sotomayor announcement

As received via e-mail:

The Supreme Court nominee announcement is coming! NYTimes 8:25 a.m.

The Supreme Court nominee announcement is coming! Washington Post 8:34 a.m.

The Supreme Court nominee is Sonia Sotomayor! NYTimes 8:39 a.m.
(Interesting that the story in this link shows a time posted as 8:15 a.m.)

The Supreme Court nominee is Sonia Sotomayor! Washington Post 8:51 a.m.

But I understand MSNBC and the AP beat them both.

80% of the Deaths: "Noncombat Related"

Eighty percent (that's right: 80%) of the deaths of our soldiers in Iraq listed in Wednesday's Washington Post (p. A14) were caused by "noncombat related" reasons.

Why?
How?
Accidents?
Illness?
Heart attacks?
Suicides?
Are soldiers shooting soldiers in "friendly fire"?
Are guns going off inside tents?
Food poisoning?
More of the poisonous showers we heard about last winter?

We should be outraged!

In June, 2007 when I inquired about these "noncombat related" deaths from Mary Hadar, the Post's editor of "Faces of the Fallen" which, sadly, run too often, she wrote me that the Defense Department frequently spends six months investigating "noncombat related" deaths, and reasons for them are seldom supplied quickly. The Post tracks them in local newspapers to try and determine why and how soldiers die.

Who tracks these "noncombat related" deaths cumulatively and the causes? Anyone? Does anyone care? Hello! Hello! Anyone there?

Certainly it seems that some of the causes of "noncombat related" deaths would help to prevent others. Does the Defense Department try to cover them up to spare embarrassment? Dereliction of duty?

We taxpayers and families demand to know. We are footing the bill not only in dollars but, more importantly, in lives, past and present.

Names of the soldiers listed November 12, 2008 in the Post who died for "noncombat related" reasons are:

Pfc. Bradley S. Coleman, 24, Martinsville, Virginia

Sgt. Scott J. Metcalf, 36, Framingham, Massachusetts

Spec. Adam M. Wenger, 27, Waterford, Michigan

Pfc. Theron V. Hobbs, 22, Albany, Georgia

and Staff Sgt. Timothy H. Walker, 38, Franklin, Tennessee was killed November 8 in Baghdad.

For what did they die?

Santa Claus at the Washington Post

Is it just me or what's with the Washington Post and the Tysons Corner Santa Claus?

I mean, huh?

Three front page stories (of the Metro section)for three consecutive days, bam, bam, bam about a displaced, fired Santa at the Mall?

What? You've got to be kidding.

Is the Santa, whom the Post "saved" and who now has been rehired due to the publicity, the promotion, the free space, the video, the audio, the negative stories about the mean ole Mall in the newspaper, maybe, the uncle, the father, the brother, the partner of a top staff member at the Post?

Or, is this "happy news" the Post is producing to reduce even more losses of younger readers? You tell me. I mean, really, I thought I was reading a "Parade" edition of an "international" newspaper.

Have interns taken over? The Post's reduction in staff is telling.

What's up, Santa?

Feliz Navidad!

Asleep at 10 p.m.: The Washington Post

Letter sent to the Post's Ombudsman, Deborah Howell, September 18, 2008

Dear Ms. Howell,

Did the Post close early last night which may offer explanation for the reasoning behind placing a feature today on the deaths of two 90-year-olds on the front page and leaving the helicopter crash which killed seven of our soldiers for page 15?

With its placement, lack of coverage and six paragraphs, the Post says to its readers that four nonagenarians out on a date and featured in 33 paragraphs with three pictures are more important than the deaths of seven of our soldiers in Iraq. Astonishing.

Would not this feature of celebration of the couples out having dinner have been more appropriate as the weekly obituary story?

Why are paragraphs devoted to ketchup and chicken more important than a small story in "Around the World" about our soldiers who died giving up their lives for us? I fail to understand.

Yahoo had a lengthy story about the helicopter crash before midnight last night.

Is the Post so immune to the Iraqi conflict and deaths of our troops that it fails to understand the significance and meaning of it all?

Had the editor left post before 10:30 p.m.? The page was already made up? There was no one on hand with the desire or energy to change makeup for another helicopter crash?

I hope you are able to provide me with a reasonable explanation, none of which are listed here.

Sincerely,

On Vacation: The Washington Post and 99 Words: Continuing Failure of Iraq War Coverage

Letter sent to the Washington Post's Ombudsman, Deborah Howell, August 21, 2008


Dear Ms. Howell,

On a day when the New York Times carries four major stories on Iraq in its front section, when the Wall Street Journal carries a story about Iraq on p. 1 above the fold, when Yahoo News lists Iraq among its Top Five stories at midnight this morning, the Washington Post has three paragraphs about Iraq. Why is that?

Once again, I hope I am wrong and that I overlooked your Iraq story, but flipping the pages twice, I am unable to locate anything more than 99 words in two of your editions today.

Sincerely,

PatriciaDC

Failure of Iraq Coverage in Washington Post

Letter sent to the Washington Post August 14, 2008


Dear Editor,

I hope you are able to correct my oversight and tell me where among the WASHINGTON POST pages today is a story about Iraq. I am unable to find one, even a short paragraph in your "Around the World" summaries.

With 140,000 of our troops stationed in Iraq and a soldier's death reported last night on Yahoo, surely the POST has not abandoned Iraq to carry a story (on the front page) about ping pong in China or a long diatribe in the latest book attack on Barack Obama or a long story about a "religious center" in China for the Beijing athletes, has it?

With the POST continuing to ignore the seemingly ceaseless tragedy in Iraq, it is no wonder that our troops feel little, if any, support from home. "Why are we here?" must be a constant refrain heard in the barracks. Gone, and they are forgotten.

Sincerely,

Patriciadc

Major Mayor Fitness Fenty

The Washington Post carried a story today about Washington Mayor Fitness Fenty. The story is big enough that you might think Adrian Fenty committed a felony, but no, he had a serious biking accident. The story describes witnesses’ accounts of the accident and how Mayor Fenty’s injuries affect his appearance and persona and blah blah blah.

What’s wrong with his image? Why not protect it? I like a mayor (or any elected official, a President?) who’s physically fit and proud of it. I like an elected official to be always dressed up and looking reverential, like he is ready to make a speech or meet someone important, like, like, maybe, somebody like me? I like an official who tries to make a good impression, who cares about his appearance.

Mayor Fenty is always sharp and distinctive. His nicely fitting, tailored suit is consistently buttoned; and he wears a colorful tie. His shoes are polished, and he is cleanly shaven. Rather like Candidate Obama.

Is there something wrong with dressing presidential? Or acting like a president? (Well, most of them anyway.) Is there something wrong with showing respect not only for himself (or herself) but also for the audience?

Wearing a golf hat, sunglasses, and golf shirt shows you are headed for the golf course, not the the highest elected post in the world.

In April I canvassed for Barack Obama in York, Pennsylvania, a day Mayor Fenty also came to town to canvass. There we were in our “glad rags” and there was the Mayor, all fit and proper, suited up, bright tie, nice suit, warm and gracious, greeting us at the gathering spot for canvassers, in a church. He said a few words to the 30 or so volunteers and shook hands with us all.

What struck me in York was Mayor Fenty’s appearance and enthusiasm. Honestly, I can’t recall much of what he said since I was so taken by the moment. And him.

Take a look at other world leaders and ask yourself: Do I want this guy making major decisions which will affect my life and those about me? Or, do I want a golfing buddy?

Image is everything, dearie. And don’t you believe otherwise.

Letter to the Washington Post's Ombudsman Re: Iraq Coverage

Dear Ms. Howell,

Congratulations to the POST! Three stories above the fold today and another one, inside.

Thank you for keeping this world tragedy in the faces of your readers. Sadly, we need to keep abreast of the war, its repercussions, its aftermath, and our participation. It's a "forgotten war," or many would like for it to be for Americans are tired of it. If it's "forgotten," what public will cry for it to end?

Sincerely,

Patriciadc

Letter to Washington Post's Ombudsman about Failure to Cover the Iraq War

(Written May 13, 2008. Check it out: No Iraq War coverage. And NO REPLY.)

Dear Ms. (Deborah) Howell,

Am I missing the Post's Iraq War story today? Why can't I find anything with a dateline from Iraq?

Aren't we still engaged in a war there?

You don't carry one mention of it today: Not on any of your pages, not one story by any of the columnists. Why?

When Americans identify the Iraq War as the second issue of concern to them, the POST fails to carry a word about it! It is no wonder the was has continued for five+ years when the media abandons it, and yet, how many of our troops are stationed there? How much money are we pouring there by the minute?

Dick Cheney and the Defense Department must be jumping up and down and drinking champagne over the Post's lack of coverage. Did you see his quote yesterday? "Good news is no news." So that means it is all good coming out of Iraq?

Perhaps I have missed the story, perhaps there is a paragraph about it somewhere, but I fail to find it anywhere, even in the one paragraph stories in "Around the World".

I believe the POST strives to be an "international" paper, but perhaps I am wrong, too, about that.

I hope you are able to tell me the page number of the story I missed in today's Washington Post about the Iraq War.

Sincerely,
Patriciadc