I won't link the tape itself, which shows Iraqi insurgent/terrorists waiting for and shooting US military in cold blood. But I will link the AC360 blog, which discusses why they aired the tape. I think three things. 1) it serves as a good training for our forces to understand insurgent techniques, so hopefully they could spot them. 2) It's a brilliant insurgent coop, getting a premier US media outlet to air their point of view. 3) It shows who's side CNN is really on - the insurgents, or whoever is fighting the U.S. I notice FOXnews isn't covering the tape, I don't know abuot other media outlets. The usually won't, if it's an 'exclusive'.

Update: Blackfive has much more on the issue, appropriately. HT: Glenn.

Confederate Yankee also has some insight. HT: Blackfive He asks why this is particularly 'newsworthy' now? What would happen if CNN got ahold of US sniper team recordings? They would not play them, it would not play into their anti-U.S. bias (and I'm not sure what to call it, they are certainly not trying to help our forces, nor promote our American way of life).


Update: from the AC 360 comments (link above). These comments closely mirror my position, but are more eloquent. However, many more seem to think it's okay to show the 'horror of war'. But in reality, that's *all* CNN shows, the bombing, the murder, the death. Granted, there's alot of it. But when there is the constant bombardment of negativity, and not a shred of anything like good news, you get negative. So it's hard to rouse the public with a drumbeat of years of negative publicity, and that's being shown in the current polls (only 25% of Americans now approve of the war in Iraq).

All other arguments aside, I boil this down to a question. Why is is that this video is aired, yet you would undoubtedly cringe at the prospect of showing similar readily available video showing US counter-sniper or other teams in similar kill situations to balance the coverage?

In priority order it seems the media is more than willing to display footage of civilian casualties first, terrorist propaganda second, and American military successes somewhere far down the list.

I wouldn't have minded this footage quite so much (it's still objectionable to support the efforts of your enemy, I don't care how you spin it), if I knew I would see balanced coverage of the successes of the US Military.
Posted By Mickey, Beaverdam Virginia : 2:29 PM ET
I served in Iraq last year when the Texas Army National Guard was called to support Operation Iraqi Freedom.

While serving, the soldiers had to put up with CNN's almost totally negative view of the war. None of the many positive events made your news program. I often said that "to CNN, if it's not blowing up - it's not news".

Now, I am disgusted by CNN's decision to air this video. No amount of spin can justify the damage you have done to the families of soldiers serving our country during trying times.

My prayers are with those soldiers serving now and their families.

I will not forget your organization's callous approach to this story. No matter how you try to rationalize your decision - you did it simply for the ratings. You had a 'hot item' and could not resist.

No, I won't forget.

You might as well change the CNN logo to Al Jazerra.
Posted By Rodney Hammack, - Plano, TX : 2:30 PM ET

Update: Foxnews has picked up the story from the opposing point of view, quoting Rep Hunter (R-CA) as wondering which side of the war CNN is on. I completely agree with that. But Foxnews adds:

Hunter's fury over the video underscores the tightrope often walked by news media in the war. Critics of the war say Americans see very little of the daily violence in Iraq because of television's reluctance to show gory footage. Dangerous conditions also keep journalists from reporting independent of military units that provide them protection.

#1 we don't need to see gory stuff every day, especially if it's against our guys.

#2 They never show gory footage of insurgents getting their asses handed to them, like they do every time they go up against coalition forces.

#3 The reason its dangerous for journalists is because, my opinion, that they have become so much a part of this war; Al Qaeda admits at least half of the war effort is through the media. The terrorists have a vested interest in making sure no good news is reported, and only their side is heard, via violence. Thus, there is nothing to really encourage these guys from not terrorizing and killing wantonly, because they know this tactic works, and when you talk and try to come to an agreement, its likely that you are not going to get exactly what you want.

#4 Another reason why there are very few reporters in Iraq is b/c of the stupid coalition media policies, as Mike Yon explained.

Update2: Also see this piece on Mike Yon's site from James Lacey, who was also embedded during the 'hot war' portion of the second Iraq war.