STORM2K

I think that the media is covering it in a good manner with many exgenerals analizing the theater of operations and also the reporters embedded with the divisions I like that because you can see very close all what is going on in that area but of course without revealing secrets.

I think there have been highs and lows. The coverage from the embedded reports is great for a news junkie even though I still don't think it's a good idea. The stateside stuff is typical overkill. I've heard the same story about the Marines getting ambushed by surrendering troops at least 100 times. You have to listen close to see if it's a new incident or the same one.

I chose excellent with this opinion reflecting the first initial days of battle. Now that things are not as fluid, would it hurt to focus on some other news as well?

I think there is alot of repeat information. I also believe alot of this in due to the fact they want to keep us informed and not all of us are watching at the same time. I think they are doing a good job and agree with marshall about the embedded reporters. While it is helpful to learn and see all we can sometimes there are things better left unseen..IMHO


Johnathan

As expected, FoxNews has the best overall coverage; I did take a look at CNN's Wolf Blitzer, in his role as an Iraq State News Services wannabe, and MSNBC's Ashley Banfield crying and wringing her hands over the treatment that "poor soldier" will receive...the one who fragged those 101st AB tents... :o

NO, THANK YOU...I'll stick with E.D. Hill, Linda Vester, Juliet Huddy, Kiran Chetry, Amy Kellogg, Jennifer Anniston, Lauren Green, Jane Skinner (and all those guys, too) who have made "Fox" the name it earned...Fair and Balanced.

I think that is a little harsh, but I respect your opinion. :o

MSNBC has been on the ball with breaking news, as has FOX. CNN has been a little slow I think.