12/5    http://fallujahinpictures.com
        About as graphic as you imagine, and very depressing.
        \_ Hmm.  The pictures are graphic and very disturbing, but the strict
           focus on mutilated bodies and wounded people seems to slant the
           'photo-essay' into a potentially distasteful political message while
           neglecting to capture any real sense of the iraqis as a people.
           I mean, if even *one* picture other than blood and gore (in the
           two weeks of grisly images I scrolled through) had been included,
           I wouldn't have formed this opinion.
           \_ What do you want?  People in a refugee camp?  Someone parallel
              parking?  Or walking their dog?  They're addressing the failure
              of the media of showing NONE of this gore, not the lives of
              Iraqis..  If they were trying to show that, they would go there
              with cameras themselves.
           \_ Well, whatever it is, it isn't journalism.  It's kind of
              a mirror image of foxnews.  What I want to see is real
              reporting on the *overall* situation in Iraq, not just
              what brave marines fighting(fox) or dead people(this blog)
              look like.  These pictures could have been from any war.
              \_ Which is a point in itself.  They could be from any war,
                 but they're from this one, and you haven't seen them
                 anywhere else.  Finding some modicum of real reporting
                 isn't hard.  You just have to look outside this country.
                 \_ I think these pictures are counter-productive. The
                    public didn't see stuff like this during WW II. I have
                    a relative in Iraq and he send back a lot of cool
                    pictures of him with Iraqi kids and stuff, but that's
                    not 'news' either because it doesn't fit anyone's
                    agenda.
                    \_ USA Today and Fox have have images like this (US soldier
                       with Iraqui chidren) on a regular basis. It's not news
                       but its great propaganda. I would guess there's a new
                       one of these each week in USA Today, for instance. This
                       does not belittle your relative's experience. The
                       implication such pictures have not been showing up in
                       the mainstream media is simply false, though.
                       \_ I haven't seen very many positive stories. It's
                          not that they don't exist, but that the negative
                          and sensationalist stories are far more common.
                    \_ No pictures like this from WW2?  Are you sure that you
                       know what you're talking about?  Pictures of Auschwitz
                       and other concentration camps were critical in raising
                       awareness of what the Nazis had done.  Just because
                       the pictures don't support the US agenda doesn't mean
                       that they should be censored, as they essentially are
                       in the US media.
                       \_ WW II was all but over by then. I have old
                          newspapers and they were not full of pictures of
                          all the people that died on D-Day, for instance.
                          This 'journalism' really began with Vietnam.
                          \_ How is it journalism to deliberately not
                             report something?  Keep in mind that there are
                             huge technological leaps between WWII and Vietnam
                             (satellite communication, etc.) and between
                             Vietnam and now (too many to list).  As has been
                             discussed in many other places, Gulf War 2 is
                             probably the most heavily covered war zone ever.
                             And the journalists covering it have technologies
                             at their disposal to increase frequency and detail
                             of stories that previous generations could only
                             dream about.  The availability of a technology
                             that increases information means that it is likely
                             to be used, regardless of how much you wring
                             your hands about it.  Moralizing will not turn
                             back the clock.  Digital cameras and the Internet
                             are a Pandora's box that we cannot close.
                             \_ The media has an obligation to present a
                                story, not to become 'reality television'
                                like showing car chases. The media
                                obviously doesn't show scenes like the
                                beheadings. Heck, they won't even show the
                                inside of a slaughterhouse (for animals).
                                We know certain things happen in war and
                                to focus on those few hideous things is to
                                ignore the big picture. There's a good
                                reason the media doesn't show graphic
                                images and they shouldn't. Let people seek
                                them out if they want them, but not in the
                                mainstream.
                                \_ The only obligation the corporate media
                                   has is to generate revenue for their
                                   shareholders.  That's it.  Fuck the
                                   corporate media.