Afghanistan - What's Missing?

Stinging from attacks by bloggers for their overt bias and continued story fabrication, the media rely a lot on "bias by omission". That is, leaving out critical details in a story so that the reader gets the opposite impression of the true story. It, along with stealth editing, is a favorite tactic of the BBC.

This AP article is another good example.

The reporter, Jim Krane, frames the story in the opening paragraph so as to make the reader believe that things are not going well for American forces in Afghanistan. He then uses that premise to explain France's additional support to coalition forces in the country.

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) - As the going gets tougher for the U.S. military in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the region, one ally has stepped up despite a recent straining of ties: France.

"As the going gets tougher"? In what way? Krane doesn't say and he hopes you don't notice and will just take his word for it. Not in the age of bloggers Krane.

What Krane deliberately leaves out of his story is that Afghanistan is to hold elections in two weeks time and security is being beefed up in anticipation that terrorists will try and intimidate voters.

And we learn this from the San Diego article.

Attacks on the U.S. military so close to Kabul are rare and Friday's assault occurred less than a week after a roadside bomb in the capital exploded near a convoy of U.S. Embassy vehicles, wounding two American staff members.

What does Krane mean by "elsewhere in the region"? Again he doesn't say but I think it's fair to say he means Iraq. But here again, Krane doesn't tell us what he means by "getting tougher". If he means US troops casualties, they are running at about average. Which is propably why Krane didn't mention Iraq by name. He hoped you'd make the inference yourself without checking.

Not in the age of bloggers, Krane. Not anymore.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------