George Bush talks to the press
Of course W's Iraq War press conference is today's big news story. I thought it might be fun to look at how the front-page headlines came out (sorry, no links):
New York Times: Bush Concedes Iraq War Erodes Political Status
LA Times: Bush Says U.S. in Iraq Through 2008
International Herald Tribune: Bush sees no pullout before '09
CNN Online: Bush: U.S. will succeed in Iraq
Washington Post: Mr. Bush Unvarnished
BBC: Bush denies Iraq is in civil war
The Guardian (UK): US troops in Iraq for another three years
San Jose Mercury News: Bush: Troops to stay in Iraq for years
Financial Times (UK): Bush tries to stem decline in support for war
The Age (Australia): Bush handballs [?!] troop withdrawal decision
Arab News (Saudi Arabia): Bush Warns of More Fighting in Iraq
Aljazeera: US faces tough fight in Iraq, Bush says
I have to say, I think the proper headline for this (news) story is that Bush will stay in Iraq for the rest of his presidency.
It's interesting to note that only the New York Times is running this as their top story, at least online. They are also the only ones to use Bush's "concession" (which the headline actually misrepresents, in my mind) as their headline. Hmm.
An interesting point made by the NY Times is that Bush has been saying the same stuff for so long that no one is really listening anymore. Which perhaps, in the eyes of the Times, explains why they were the only newspaper to latch so strongly onto the Bush's assertion that he's spending his political capital on this war.
Although their choice to run that headline as the lead story seems to me overtly political in light of the other content of Bush's speech, the article's point is a good one. Look at the difference between the CNN and BBC headlines. To me, both of these initially looked like examples of editors saying, "OK, if he wants to say stupid stuff, we'll let him." But then you think about the CNN headline, and actually it's sort of propaganda-y. It's just that for many people, including me, that headline reads: "Today in the news: George Bush says the same thing he always says. Hoo-ray."
New York Times: Bush Concedes Iraq War Erodes Political Status
LA Times: Bush Says U.S. in Iraq Through 2008
International Herald Tribune: Bush sees no pullout before '09
CNN Online: Bush: U.S. will succeed in Iraq
Washington Post: Mr. Bush Unvarnished
BBC: Bush denies Iraq is in civil war
The Guardian (UK): US troops in Iraq for another three years
San Jose Mercury News: Bush: Troops to stay in Iraq for years
Financial Times (UK): Bush tries to stem decline in support for war
The Age (Australia): Bush handballs [?!] troop withdrawal decision
Arab News (Saudi Arabia): Bush Warns of More Fighting in Iraq
Aljazeera: US faces tough fight in Iraq, Bush says
I have to say, I think the proper headline for this (news) story is that Bush will stay in Iraq for the rest of his presidency.
It's interesting to note that only the New York Times is running this as their top story, at least online. They are also the only ones to use Bush's "concession" (which the headline actually misrepresents, in my mind) as their headline. Hmm.
An interesting point made by the NY Times is that Bush has been saying the same stuff for so long that no one is really listening anymore. Which perhaps, in the eyes of the Times, explains why they were the only newspaper to latch so strongly onto the Bush's assertion that he's spending his political capital on this war.
Although their choice to run that headline as the lead story seems to me overtly political in light of the other content of Bush's speech, the article's point is a good one. Look at the difference between the CNN and BBC headlines. To me, both of these initially looked like examples of editors saying, "OK, if he wants to say stupid stuff, we'll let him." But then you think about the CNN headline, and actually it's sort of propaganda-y. It's just that for many people, including me, that headline reads: "Today in the news: George Bush says the same thing he always says. Hoo-ray."