Posted on Apr 25, 2016
Why every active, retired, and veteran service member needs to hold the media accountable
19.6K
81
23
27
27
0
I just got into a rather short and quick exchange with the my local newspaper, the Orange County California Register, concerning an article they recently wrote about a military veteran. My issue? When discussing crimes committed by former servicemen and servicewomen, why is it necessary to make note of their service?
That particular article’s headline was, “Man pleads guilty to cutting up his Dana Point girlfriend in Panama, leaving her remains in backpack.” The OC Register then tweeted this headline as, “Former Marine pleads guilty to killing Dana Point's Yvonne Baldelli in Panama.”
You and I both know it, and we have both seen it. A woman kills a family in a drunken car accident. You instantly have my attention, and I am willing to read the article. But more often than not, the headline will identify if it was a former Marine, a decorated war hero, or a three time Iraq veteran who killed family in a PTSD- or alcohol-induced accident.
Is the extra information excessive? To me, it is.
I don’t think it is too much of a stretch to say that the media is obsessed with gaining page views and clicks. If you haven’t noticed this is occuring, you probably aren’t reading your local news enough. My proposition to all of you is to read your local news and, if this behavior bothers you as it bothers me, to let them know it. Write letters demonstrating how the action of one service member should not constitute a negative image on the whole - when it is appropriate.
If it’s mentioned inside of the article with rationale, then I have no problem with their service being included. If the first thing you read is a diatribe about military members, their predisposition towards violence, and a picture of them from twenty years ago toting an M16-A2, and it bothers you as much as it bothers me, then speak up! Every time I see these articles, I cringe and wait for someone to ask me if I know them personally. I understand that we are held to a higher standard and I am proud to say that 99% of us maintain that standard. We all feel it when one of our flock messes up. Pride runs deep in the armed forces, and nothing needs to be said that could enhance our collective sense of responsibility and guilt.
It’s a small and less-than-damning example, but it does what it needs to do. It puts the honor, courage, and commitment of our services on display by stating a former member is accused of a horrific crime. If they are guilty, let them burn. I say again, let them burn. I just wonder how many jobs that offender had in between the Marine Corps and now that could have just as easily been used to identify them. I am still waiting for a “Former Customer Service Representative kills friend after being away from company for 20 years.”
I ask that everyone, past and present military, take the time to think about how our honor, courage, and commitment can be easily siphoned off in order to generate a titillating piece. We may not all agree on much of anything, but none of us wants our service to be tarnished, and we must take a stand when it is.
That particular article’s headline was, “Man pleads guilty to cutting up his Dana Point girlfriend in Panama, leaving her remains in backpack.” The OC Register then tweeted this headline as, “Former Marine pleads guilty to killing Dana Point's Yvonne Baldelli in Panama.”
You and I both know it, and we have both seen it. A woman kills a family in a drunken car accident. You instantly have my attention, and I am willing to read the article. But more often than not, the headline will identify if it was a former Marine, a decorated war hero, or a three time Iraq veteran who killed family in a PTSD- or alcohol-induced accident.
Is the extra information excessive? To me, it is.
I don’t think it is too much of a stretch to say that the media is obsessed with gaining page views and clicks. If you haven’t noticed this is occuring, you probably aren’t reading your local news enough. My proposition to all of you is to read your local news and, if this behavior bothers you as it bothers me, to let them know it. Write letters demonstrating how the action of one service member should not constitute a negative image on the whole - when it is appropriate.
If it’s mentioned inside of the article with rationale, then I have no problem with their service being included. If the first thing you read is a diatribe about military members, their predisposition towards violence, and a picture of them from twenty years ago toting an M16-A2, and it bothers you as much as it bothers me, then speak up! Every time I see these articles, I cringe and wait for someone to ask me if I know them personally. I understand that we are held to a higher standard and I am proud to say that 99% of us maintain that standard. We all feel it when one of our flock messes up. Pride runs deep in the armed forces, and nothing needs to be said that could enhance our collective sense of responsibility and guilt.
It’s a small and less-than-damning example, but it does what it needs to do. It puts the honor, courage, and commitment of our services on display by stating a former member is accused of a horrific crime. If they are guilty, let them burn. I say again, let them burn. I just wonder how many jobs that offender had in between the Marine Corps and now that could have just as easily been used to identify them. I am still waiting for a “Former Customer Service Representative kills friend after being away from company for 20 years.”
I ask that everyone, past and present military, take the time to think about how our honor, courage, and commitment can be easily siphoned off in order to generate a titillating piece. We may not all agree on much of anything, but none of us wants our service to be tarnished, and we must take a stand when it is.
Media
Accountability
Leadership
Pride
Command Post
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 17
1
1
0
I support freedom of speech, Sgt. Biggs, as I believe you do. What I don't support, as I believe you don't either, is proclamation by implication: former military = bad person. A crime is a crime is a crime. As you say, if they're guilty, they need to be punished and in most cases I think they will be. That said, you've identified what I'd call is an implied distrust or deliberate generalization by the media of former military members, one that seems to be growing, particularly after several years of so-called progressive politics. You're right to assume we need to watch our backs. Warrior class is becoming increasingly ostracized by a less-than-valient mass media and, to a degree, mainstream society.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I have mixed feelings on this. On the one hand, I absolutely see the point being made and agree that those types of headlines can build a false impression about the entire veteran population. But on the other hand, has anyone complained about headlines like "Former Marine apprehends Convenience Store Robber" or "Former Marine saves drowning child"? It's the flip side of the same coin. In both cases, the stories play on an aspect of military service. In one, the fact that military people are trained to kill people. In the other, the fact that military people also are courageous and willing to risk their own life to save others.
So I don't know if we can really say to the press, hey, highlight our service for positive stories but not for negative ones.
So I don't know if we can really say to the press, hey, highlight our service for positive stories but not for negative ones.
(1)
(0)
Sgt William Biggs
I think my reservation is when it is totally unnecessary. It bothers me when either positive or negative aspects of a SM's history is put on display when it has no bearing. The article I spoke of . . . I think they guy served an enlistment over twenty years ago. It was about a recent murder that wasn't military centric.
The articles seemed so desperate for clicks that it needed to highlight the guy being a Marine. That is my focal point in keeping the media responsible. Their words can affect society's views on the military and I don't want to see a journalist ride the coat tails of the many veterans who served honorably.
The articles seemed so desperate for clicks that it needed to highlight the guy being a Marine. That is my focal point in keeping the media responsible. Their words can affect society's views on the military and I don't want to see a journalist ride the coat tails of the many veterans who served honorably.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Yes, there does appear to be a pattern of the media bringing up someone's service history and implying that it contributed to their actions. It's not right at all to make up a story from an incomplete picture.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
well, to me, and I have had a few run ins with the media as well, the fact that the mainstream media is so far to the left, their liberal agenda shows through in everything they do. They hate us as their political masters hate us and everything that we stand for, DUTY, HONOR, COUNTRY. They are the ultimate at narcsacisim (sp) as opposed to we who believe in selfless service. Therefore I only watch the local and that just for the weather reports, or a little of the local things going on and nothing else.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
It happens all the time, and not just to the military. How many times have you seen an article called out race when doing so contributed nothing to the article? Let's face it: "White kid shoots black kid" is nothing more than a way of making "kid shoots kid" more incendiary. (With the exception of cases where it actually is racially motivated of course.)
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google