Personally I applaud Nightline for reading the names of the dead. It is a shame though that over 200 will not be read, those who died in accidents or (more frightening that we never hear about these) by suicide.

And lest we forget those who have and continue to die in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

I agree with Jeff Jarvis on this. Sinclair should let Nightline air--and read Hyman's statement before and after the airing.

If the American people believe we're doing the right thing, they are willing to sacrifice a lot.

Sooner or later, I'm sure, I'll be found out. The word will be out that I went around via Google to the various anti-Bush weblogs, and much like a busy little bee, deposited a comment in those weblogs that allow for such.

At one particular weblog I visited, the bloggeuse was at the time in despair. Seemingly, indisputable files documenting Dumb'ya's misgovernance grow thicker and even more nauseating daily. Nonetheless, his lead in the polls increases. And so, Joe et alii, I asked myself a couple questions. What could be going on? What could be the explanation?

Well, here's some of the comment I left. "Nobody cares to admit that their country willfully elevated a nincompoop to head of state. It's sort'a like admitting tha'cher favorite aunt gets her jollies from 'communing' with alligators. Aaay, c'mon, that's the best way I know how to phrase it ... gimme a break. For all we know, the current chairman of the Federal Communications Commission checks up on your website DAILY."

And here's the permissible portion of the comment I left.

"I'd like you to consider reading the text for a "state of the union" address that I believe is imperative for this country of ours. To get to it, all you need do is click on the below enclosed U.R.L

http://www.bcvoice.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=205

By the way, the proprietors of the www.BCVoice.com website have provided a couple ways for you to leave your comments."

I think Mark called it right. Koppel won't be paying any tribute, he will just flash some names and then editorialize, shielding himself from any critism.

I prefered Fox's Wall, where they had pictures of people in service, sent in by their families. It was tastefull and non-political. Koppel will be neither.

Bryan -
I would as well, if they'd done it for the victims of 9/11, or the servicmen killed in Afghanistan, or for the victims of the USS Cole attack, or the victims of the embassy bombings.... the list goes on. Reading the names of our dead from Iraq, and only Iraq, during May sweeps strikes me as agenda-driven.

Brian - I liked Fox's Wall as well.

For a major network to say they didn't realize that it was "sweeps" for May is just as believeable as a UAW member saying he doesn't know when payday is.

How ignorant of TV demographics do you have to be to think that reading the names of the dead will drive up ratings? That's just nuts. Sex sells, violence sells, scandal sells. Long lists of names with pictures are at very best (from a ratings standpoint) boring, and at worst (again, from a ratings standpoint) will have people flipping the channel after less than a minute, either out of boredom or because they can't stand the litany of pain and suffering behind the names and faces of the dead.

Sitting through the whole list will be excruciating for anyone with an iota of compassion for the families of the dead. If you believe the price is worth it (as I do), then it's worthwhile to acknowledge the full measure of that price. If the full measure of the price being paid is too much, then you have an obligation to work to bring our troops back home. Either way, hiding from the price of this war is at best disengenuous and at worst cowardly.

ABC is doing this because they couldn't get the pictures of the flag-draped coffins. The motive is the same: generate anti-war feeling.

I always knew Abraham Lincoln was a closet Confederate sympathizer, hurting Union morale with his anti-war speeches. How else could you characterize that tear-jerker with the goopy "last full measure of devotion". And that other speech with "Fondly do we hope--fervently do we pray--that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away." Talk about defeatism.

Luckily, someone named Abner Doubleday has just invented baseball. We can broadcast that instead.

Paying tribute to those who have lost their lives in Iraq is admirable. At any other time I might support the decision to do so. There have been several significant dates on which this could have been done clearly as a tribute to those lost and for no other network agenda.

To read these names during May sweeps is clearly ABC's attempt to grab ratings they have not been able to earn from their lackluster regular programming. The claim that programmers did not realize they were scheduling the airing during sweeps is absurd and laughable. Networks spend from one sweeps to the next analyzing and planning schedules to maximize ratings and therefore the very revenue from which they survive.

To exploit those who gave their lives in Iraq in this way is reprehensible and offensive. No matter how one personally feels about our presence in Iraq, our service men and women deserve better.

Paying tribute to those who have lost their lives in Iraq is admirable. At any other time I might support the decision to do so. There have been several significant dates on which this could have been done clearly as a tribute to those lost and for no other network agenda.

To read these names during May sweeps is clearly ABC's attempt to grab ratings they have not been able to earn from their lackluster regular programming. The claim that programmers did not realize they were scheduling the airing during sweeps is absurd and laughable. Networks spend from one sweeps to the next analyzing and planning schedules to maximize ratings and therefore the very revenue from which they survive.

To exploit those who gave their lives in Iraq in this way is reprehensible and offensive. No matter how one personally feels about our presence in Iraq, our service men and women deserve better.

The prime cause for suspicion (apart from the disingenuous pretense of not knowing when "sweeps week" is - which by itself would be overlookable given Andrew Case's point that reading a long list of names for an hour is not going to be a likely ratings booster in the first place) is that they are reading the names of those killed in Iraq, but not Afghanistan, for some reason. Why such disrespect for those killed in Afghanistan? Why don't they "count"? There is no answer to this question that does not involve bias on the part of those who made the editorial decision.

I write to strongly protest your decision to instruct Sinclair's ABC affiliates to preempt this evening's Nightline program. I find deeply offensive Sinclair's objection to Nightline's intention to broadcast the names and photographs of Americans who gave their lives in service to our country in Iraq.

I supported the President's decision to go to war in Iraq, and remain a strong supporter of that decision. But every American has a responsibility to understand fully the terrible costs of war and the extraordinary sacrifices it requires of those brave men and women who volunteer to defend the rest of us; lest we ever forget or grow insensitive to how grave a decision it is for our government to order Americans into combat. It is a solemn responsibility of elected officials to accept responsibility for our decision and its consequences, and, with those who disseminate the news, to ensure that Americans are fully informed of those consequences.

There is no valid reason for Sinclair to shirk its responsibility in what I assume is a very misguided attempt to prevent your viewers from completely appreciating the extraordinary sacrifices made on their behalf by Americans serving in Iraq. War is an awful, but sometimes necessary business. Your decision to deny your viewers an opportunity to be reminded of war's terrible costs, in all their heartbreaking detail, is a gross disservice to the public, and to the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. It is, in short, sir, unpatriotic. I hope it meets with the public opprobrium it most certainly deserves.

Andrew Case -
I'm not positive I'm addressing the actual point you were trying to make, but I don't think that this will drive up ratings, nor do I think that Koppel and the other folks who decided to air this did either. I think they selected the time period because it was May sweeps - and therefore more likely to be watched than on, say, Memorial Day.

It is not 'hiding from the price of this war' to find such a display distasteful, any more than not publicly naming rape victims is hiding from the price of violence against women. There are other ways to respect our dead that would be a) more interesting than just a solid list and b) seem less politically motivated.

The shameful retreat has begun:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55329-2004Apr30.html

Some people in Washington have finally figured out that there is no military solution. Well, better to lose face than to prolong a war with no victory in sight.

Personally, I don't care whether this is politically motivated on the part of ABC or not. As long as the show is done reverently and tastefully, I don't care if it was all Ralph Nader's idea. I think that we should be reading those names every single hour.

Being that my husband is active duty military, I have strong feelings about this. I believe that the people of this country should be CONSTANTLY reminded of the dead war heroes. These people sacrificed their very lives for us, and we all want to hide from them? Don't show coffins with flags draped over them, don't read their names. Is it only okay to acknowledge them as numbers? Does that make the whole thing less real?

I am not some anti-war protester type. I supported Pres. Bush in going to Iraq. I felt that it needed to be done. But I also see that our nation's best and brightest are coming home in body bags, and I think we need to look at that too. If their sacrifice is to be appreciated, it must first be acknowledged.

And if it took ABC making a "Political Statement" to accomplish that, then shame on the rest of us for making their statement necessary and newsworthy.

Lisa Bragg
Navy Wife

Lisa Bragg -
I have no problem with being reminded of our dead war heroes, but doesn't it bother you a little bit that the only ones being mentioned here are the ones on the most-contested battlefield? Koppel isn't doing anything to acknowledge those who died in Afghanistan, and it was only under pressure that he added military non-combat deaths in Iraq. And it strikes me as a bit unbalanced to present the "cost of the war on terrorism" without explaining why we're ponying up the price - namely thousands dead from terrorist attacks.

John M., boy you sure got that right -- no way the WaPo would spin a military move, right, boyo?. For some counter-spin try consulting the source.

Celeste,
I disagree that it's more likely to be watched during sweeps week - after all, that's when the competition is toughest, since it's sweeps week for everyone, so everyone is trying to draw viewers.

Story is getting big play on the infotainment channels (radio) with all presenting "both sides" but each commentator having varied bias. This is getting more play than it deserves.

The "sweeps" issue seems to be largely ignored with varied opinions dragging in intentional coincidence with "end of war" speech, historical reference to an article LIFE ran during Nam war, and general confusion.

Nothing like the second guessing game when there's nothing else "breaking." (I flip around digital satellite radio stations all day, sort of background noise, although "stories" like this drive me batty.)

Aha, FOX is beating up on Howard Dean again. Nostalgia. ;)

Wonder what all three would be doing without the "Michael Jackson Story?" Bring back a new slant on the "baking lady?" ;)

Virtually no hard news about Fallujah, the Iraqi generals, their "army," etc. today. :(

Lots of worry about the motivations of one program of the Big (Old) Three bankrupt news services. :(

I'm sorry, but I can't resist.

Having just posted on bias in another thread, I ran across this from Scrappleface.com...

Koppel to Read Names of Saddam's Victims

(2004-04-30) -- ABC-TV journalist Ted Koppel, who caused a firestorm of controversy with his plan to read the names of U.S. troops killed in Iraq, today announced that in the interest of balance and fairness next week he will read another list on his show, Nightline.

"I would never want anyone to accuse me of bias. After all, I'm a journalist, devoted to accurately portraying world events," said Mr. Koppel. "So, next week I will read the list of Iraqis who were raped, tortured and killed by Saddam Hussein's regime after President George H.W. Bush declared victory in the Gulf War on February 28, 1991."

Mr. Koppel said next week's Nightline will be a "special extended episode starting Friday and running non-stop until the day I retire from ABC."

In September 2001, Sinclair Broadcasting required its affiliates to air messages "conveying full support" for the Bush administration. At a Baltimore affiliate, WBFF "officials required news and sports anchors, even a weather forecaster, to read the messages, "which included statements such as "[the station] wants you to know that we stand 100% behind our President." Several WBFF staffers objected on the grounds that reading the statements would "erode their reputations as objective journalists" because it made them appear to be "endorsing specific government actions."

What bewilders me is that reaction to the coffin and the name-reading questions seems to be orthogonal to people's opinion of the war. Even being against the war, I don't see how these actions help to end the war or justify my beliefs. Is it that pro-war guys are nervous? Maybe guilty about how most the pre-war hype was false and about how now all the possible outcomes look so bad? [See Tacitus.] Yet Sen. McCain and many other war supporters feel on the readings as I do.

You know, Mr. Chips as Acting Headmaster called out the names of the fallen Bloomfield boys every week. I don't think it's because he was against World War One. (The small scandal was when he called out the name of the school's pre-war German teacher, who had fallen on the other side.)

In September 2001, Sinclair Broadcasting required its affiliates to air messages "conveying full support" for the Bush administration. At a Baltimore affiliate, WBFF "officials required news and sports anchors, even a weather forecaster, to read the messages, "which included statements such as "[the station] wants you to know that we stand 100% behind our President." Several WBFF staffers objected on the grounds that reading the statements would "erode their reputations as objective journalists" because it made them appear to be "endorsing specific government actions."

What bewilders me is that reaction to the coffin and the name-reading questions seems to be orthogonal to people's opinion of the war. Even being against the war, I don't see how these actions help to end the war or justify my beliefs. Is it that pro-war guys are nervous? Maybe guilty about how most the pre-war hype was false and about how now all the possible outcomes look so bad? [See Tacitus.] Yet Sen. McCain and many other war supporters feel on the readings as I do.

You know, Mr. Chips as Acting Headmaster called out the names of the fallen Bloomfield boys every week. I don't think it's because he was against World War One. (The small scandal was when he called out the name of the school's pre-war German teacher, who had fallen on the other side.)

It only hurts the pro-war cause to not see justice when it's staring you right in the face. Koppel is giving those dead justice. Or would Mr. Bush rather we go shopping instead?

Here is the response I received from KGTV San Diego regarding the Nightline program which apparently is called "The Fallen".

I took out personal information to avoid issues with spam, etc.

Dear Mr. SBD:

Thank yu for your letter to KGTV regarding tonight's Nightline program "The Fallen."

Your comments are duly noted. However, your suggestion that this is just an attempt to get ratings is without merit. As ABC News states: "the planned Nightline is an expression of respect which simply seeks to honor those who have laid down their lives for this country." We have talked to some families of the fallen soldiers who feel this program is totally appropriate and respectful.

KGTV will be airing the program tonight at 11:35PM. We will let our viewers decide whether they want to watch it or not.

Thank you again for taking the time to write as we appreciate viewer comments and suggestions about our news programming.

Sincerely,


Mike Stutz
News Director
KGTV
P.O. Box 85347
San Diego, CA 92186
(619) 237-6311

-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx [mailto:webmaster@xxxxxxxxx.com]
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 12:30 PM
To: Stutz, Michael
Subject: Nightline tonight April 30th, 2004

Dear Mr. Stutz,

I am writing to you to express my disgust about the upcoming Nightline show airing tonight. I am sure you are aware that it is sweeps week which only goes to show that ABC is only interested in ratings and not a tribute to the fallen soldiers. Can you honestly tell me that you believe that displaying the pictures of the slain soldiers would be what these soldiers would want? Don’t you think that this display from a dieing show to try to get ratings will not raise the moral of the troops currently fighting the war on terror. These soldiers will be rolling in their graves tonight as this show airs. If Nightline wants to honor our troops, then I would suggest airing a show with the victims of terror and the great sacrifice that was made by are troops. If you or anyone at ABC would like to see what a real tribute looks like, I would suggest taking a look at this Tribute to 911 that was put together by a former Vietnam POW.

http://www.nevermoveon.org

Take a look at it and pull the Nightline show tonight and replace it with this tribute and I will guarantee you that you will achieve your precious ratings.

Regretfully yours,

SBD

Letter to the Editor of the NY Times, 5/1/04:

To the Editor:

If Ted Koppel's reading on "Nightline" of the names of the American soldiers killed in Iraq is antiwar and threatens to undermine support for the war in Iraq, then I suppose the next logical step is to cancel Memorial Day this year.

ALAN BECKOFF
Hollis Hills, Queens, April 30, 2004

Right on, Alan. Memorial Day is just an election-year ploy.

How dare Koppel or anyone else remind those who bravely support the war from the danger of their living rooms that the Bush administration's parade of blunders kills actual human beings.

But at least they haven't died in vain.

Yeah, right.

I would like the news media to inform me, before focusing on persuading me of the merits of whatever position is held by reporters and editors on the issue in question.

In the current climate, it is easy to impugn the motives of Nightline's staff. Their message could be, "these hundreds of American lives were squandered by George Bush." But then it could be meant to highlight the honor and tragedy of the deaths of these soldiers in the service of our country.

I can't read minds, and anyway I'm more interested in Wretchard's opinions on events in Iraq than in Ted Koppel's. His is a peculiar take on the news--should we expect Nightlines devoted to lists of mining accident victims, or of patients waiting for kidney transplants, or of state lottery winners?

That said, as a war supporter, I want my fellow citizens to be fully informed about the terrible costs of this war. I want our military honored, and our fallen remembered.

So I'll endorse Andrew Lazurus' take, as he's expressed it in this thread (4/30, 6:04pm & following). Whatever Koppel means, he is following, clumsily, in Lincoln's footsteps. If only that was the mainstream media's worst transgression.

I sent a suggestion to FOX that they do the whole nine yards. Every morning start the show off with a tribute to the over 9,000 Americans that have died in the WOT. Do it on the anniversy of the day they died. The Department of State has a web site covering all the terrorist events since 1980. On the anniversary of an attack do a short story on the victim(s) and their survivors.
Example;
On 23 February, 1997, a Palestinian gunman entered the observation deck at the Empire State building in New York City and opened fire on tourists, killing a Danish man and wounding visitors from the United States, Argentina, Switzerland, and France before turning the gun on himself. A note carried by the gunman indicated that this was a punishment attack against the "enemies of Palestine."
Anybody remember this? I'll bet the Loved ones of that Danish man do.
And to be fair and balanced how about some of the successes?
In January a total of 12 letter bombs with Alexandria, Egypt, postmarks were discovered in holiday greeting cards mailed to the United States. On two separate days during January, nine letter bombs were discovered in the Washington, DC, and United Nations offices of the Saudi-owned al-Hayat newspaper. In addition, three letter bomb devices were sent to the federal prison in Fort Leavenworth Kansas. None of the letter bombs detonated, and there were no public claims of responsibility. A similar device mailed to the al-Hayat office in London on 13 January did explode, injuring two persons. Subsequently, three more devices were found. The incidents are under investigation by the FBI.
And will be until the FBI finds them or the Islamists take over America. I just took 1997 at random. There were 304 attacks by terrorists that year, in most of which the perps got away to kill again. It was a more or less typical year.

So America hates an alleged POTUS moron whose morals-based beliefs, read FOOLISH NAIVETE and MISTAKES, has resulted in one of the most successful agendas in American and political history, but wants an intellectualist, matriculated lawyer, former Arkansas attorney general, and Govnuh who is great at making promises and commitments he won't keep, or never intended to keep! Besides Bill Clinton's "I'm a jock like MoonLighting's Bruce Willis" character, his intellect was, comparative to Dubya, good enough to graduate from law school and later become Governor and POTUS, but not good enough to remember high school civics as to whom is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the USA sworn to uphold the laws [he himself as POTUS]. The alteriorim-loving Left is basically saying that America wants and needs dedicated LIARS-FAKERS as societal, national, or geopol leaders, but gosh darn it, gee whillickers, we Americans just don't want to say, admit or believe we do, just as that all we Americans need is to "believe" that we are participating in our own government although deep down all Americans must know that in reality we aren't. SECULARISM IS NO LONGER ABOUT NEUTRALISM BUT ABSOLUTISM - we need the welfare state and the righteous liars and faker politicians who control it - Deep down each and every American must hate America and Americanism, ergo we not only need, but nay we MUST submit, and we DEMAND SUBMISSION, to under UN-based Global Government, where we will give up our sovereignty and wealth because America is "bad, and Americans are "bad", and Westernism and God and Democracy is "bad", ergo we deserve to believe under the UNOWG we 'll still run the world when in reality we'll be charged from Communist Russia and China. I DEMAND MY GOD-GIVEN, OOPS FORCE-GIVEN. OOPS TREE-GIVEN, OOPS....................................................................................................CLINTONIAN, COMMUNISTS/CENTRALISTS-FOR-FEDERALIST-REPUBLICANISM, NATIONAL UNITARIAN, GLOBAL INTEGRATED CONFEDERATE RIGHT AS AN AMERICAN TO BE DESTROYED AND KILLED, G****** *T [ha-ha]! CAN A FASCIST ANTI-FACIST = ANTI-FASCIST FASCIST;IS A RUSSIAN "COMMUNIST CAPITALIST" = AMERICAN "NATIONAL LIBERAL"; CAN RIGHT-LEANING DEMOCRATS-LIBERALS=STILL LEFTISTS!?

Jeesh.

It has been repeatedly demonstrated that the Chicken Hawks, who control the Administration DO NOT WANT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE to know what this vendetta based "war" is going to cost, either in your and my tax dollars or in human lives. Sinclair Broascasting was simply toeinig the party line as a good propaganda outlet should. By the way, I'm equally certain that Sinclair failed to mention the local police beat news from last Tuesday night, which revealed that David D. Smith, the owner and CEO of Sinclair was busted by Baltimore City Police for "soliciting prostitution" in Baltimore City in a company Mercedes, and according the involved woman, he was her "regular date". How's that for "high moral ground"?

David Laning,

Neither of your ad hominem attacks merit a response. Read this thread and others on this site, and learn how regular commenters engage the issues under discussion. If you can't or won't debate civilly, I'd suggest that there are other sites, left and right, that better suit your style.